Article published in:
Into adpositions: New formal perspectives on the structure of the PP and its variation
Edited by Víctor Acedo-Matellán, Theresa Biberauer, Jaume Mateu and Anna Pineda
[Linguistic Variation 21:1] 2021
► pp. 1145
References

References

Abney, Steven
1987The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Adger, David
2013A syntax of substance. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis
2001Functional structure in nominals: Nominalization and ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011The aspectual properties of nominalization structures. In Alexandra Galani, Glyn Hicks & George Tsoulas (eds.), Morphology and its interfaces, 47–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Gianina Iordăchioaia & Florian Schäfer
2011Scaling the variation in Romance and Germanic nominalizations. In Antonia Petronella Sleeman & Harry Perridon (eds.), The noun phrase in Romance and Germanic: Structure, variation, and change, 25–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark C.
1988Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baltin, Mark R.
1989Heads and projections. In Mark R. Baltin & Anthony S. Kroch (eds.), Alternative conceptions of phrase structure, 1–16. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric
2010Why edges are needed. In Anna Maria Di Sciullo & Virginia Hill (eds.), Edges, heads, and projections: Interface properties, 11–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit
1984Parametric syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005The normal course of events (structuring sense, vol. ii). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borsley, Robert D. & Jaklin Kornfilt
2000Mixed extended projections. In Robert D. Borsley (ed.), The nature and function of syntactic categories, 101–131. San Diego, Ca.: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borthen, Kaia
2003Norwegian bare singulars: NTNU, Trondheim dissertation.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan
1972Theory of complementation in English syntax. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Brody, Michael
2000Mirror Theory: Syntactic representation in Perfect Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 31(1). 29–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1957Syntactic structures. ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995The minimalist program. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2007Approaching UG from below. In Uli Sauerland & Hans-Martin Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky’s minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics, 1–18. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2008On phases. In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, 133–166. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Problems of projection. Lingua 130. 33–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
1999Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel
2010On the functional structure of locative and directional PPs. In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping spatial PPs: Cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 6, 74–126. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Elbourne, Paul
2008The argument from binding. Philosophical Perspectives 22(1). 89–110. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emonds, Joseph
1985A unified theory of syntactic categories (Studies in Generative Grammar 19). Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Svein Lie & Kjell Ivar Vannebo
1997Norsk referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1968The case for case. In Emmon Bach & Robert T. Harms (eds.), Universals in linguistic theory, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Gawron, Jean Mark
1986Situations and prepositions. Linguistics and Philosophy 9(3). 327–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane
1991Extended projections. Ms. Brandeis University.Google Scholar
2005Extended projection. In Jane Grimshaw (ed.), Words and structure, 1–73. Stanford, Ca.: CSLI. Revised version of 1991 ms.Google Scholar
Hale, Ken & Samuel Jay Keyser
2002Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 39). Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haumann, Dagmar
2011The syntax of subordination. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
1973The base rules for prepositional phrases. In Stephen Anderson & Paul Kiparsky (eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle, 345–356. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
1977X̄ syntax: A study of phrase structure (Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 2). Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda
2000Prepositions, postpositions, circumpositions, and particles. In Hilda Koopman (ed.), The syntax of specifiers and heads, 204–260. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin & John Whitman
2011Afterword: Nominalizations in syntactic theory. Lingua 121(7). 1297–1313. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koster, Jan
1978Why subject sentences don’t exist. In Samuel Jay Keyser (ed.), Recent transformational studies in European languages, 53–64. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lohndal, Terje
2014aSentential subjects in English and Norwegian. Syntaxe et Semantique 15(1). 81–113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014bSentential subjects: Topics or real subjects? In Robert E. Santana-LaBarge (ed.), Proceedings of the 31st West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 315–324. Somerville, Ma.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David
1982Paths and categories. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Pietroski, Paul M.
2005Events and semantic architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
2008Verb meaning and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian & Peter Svenonius
2002The lexical syntax and lexical semantics of the verb-particle construction. In Line Mikkelsen & Christopher Potts (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 21, 387–400. Somerville, Ma.: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
2014Deriving the functional hierarchy. Language Sciences 46(B). 152–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rauh, Gisa
1993On the grammar of lexical and non-lexical prepositions in English. In Cornelia Zelinsky-Wibbelt (ed.), The semantics of prepositions: From mental processing to natural language processing, 99–150. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Riemsdijk, Henk
1990Functional prepositions. In H. Pinkster & I. Genee (eds.), Unity in diversity, 229–241. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998Categorial feature magnetism: The endocentricity and distribution of projections. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 2. 1–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Riemsdijk, Henk & Riny Huybregts
2002Location and locality. In Marc van Oostendorp & Elena Anagnostopoulou (eds.), Progress in grammar: Articles at the 20th anniversary of the Comparison of Grammatical Models group in Tilburg, 1–23. Amsterdam: Meertens In-stituut. www​.meertens​.knaw​.nl​/books​/progressingrammar/
Rijkhoff, J.
2002The noun phrase. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1997The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sheehan, Michelle & Wolfram Hinzen
2011Moving towards the edge. Linguistic Analysis 37(3–4). 405–458.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim
1981Origins of phrase structure. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
1996The phrase structure of tense. In Johan Rooryck & Lauri Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 277–291. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, Peter
1996Review of den Dikken 1995, Particles . Language 74. 816–820. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Limits on P: filling in holes vs. falling in holes. Nordlyd, Tromsø Working Papers on Language and Linguistics . Proceedings of the 19th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics 31(2). 431–445.Google Scholar
2007Adpositions, particles, and the arguments they introduce. In Eric Reuland, Tanmoy Bhattacharya & Giorgos Spathas (eds.), Argument structure, 71–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Projections of P. In Anna Asbury, Jakub Dotlacil, Berit Gehrke & Rick Nouwen (eds.), Syntax and semantics of spatial p, 63–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Spatial prepositions in English. In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping spatial PPs: Cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 6, 127–160. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Crossref
2016aComplex predicates as complementation structures. In Léa Nash & Pollet Samvelian (eds.), Approaches to complex predicates, 212–247. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016bSpans and words. In Heidi Harley & Daniel Siddiqi (eds.), Morphological metatheory, 199–220. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, Peter & Knut Tarald Taraldsen
2007The construct state in Norwegian prepositional phrases. Ms. CASTL, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
1978Figure and ground in complex sentences. In Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of human language, vol. 4, 625–649. Stanford, Ca.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Terzi, Arhonto
2010Locative prepositions and Place . In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping spatial PPs: Cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 6, 196–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Complex spatial expressions. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, 1–25. Wiley 2nd edn.. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wiltschko, Martina
2014The universal structure of categories: Towards a formal typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar