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. 247279
References

References

Acedo-Matellán, Victor
2016The morphosyntax of transitions: A case study in Latin and other languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asbury, Anna, Berit Gehrke & Veronika Hegedus
2007One size fits all: Prefixes, particles, adpositions and cases as members of the category P. In Cem Keskin (ed.), UiL OTS Yearbook, 1–17. Utrecht: UiL OTS.Google Scholar
Beavers, John, Beth Levin & Shiao Wei Tham
2010The typology of motion revisited. Journal of Linguistics 46. 331–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, Melissa & Erik Pederson
1992Topological relations picture series. In Stephen. C. Levinson (ed.), Space stimuli kit 1.2: November 1992, 51–59. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Bucaklişi, İsmail A., Hasan Uzunhasanoğlu & İrfan Aleksiva
2007Didi Lazuri nenapuna- Büyük Lazca Sözlük. İstanbul: Chiviyazilari.Google Scholar
Caha, Pavel
2007The superset principle. GLOW 2007 presentation [Generative Linguistics in the Old World]. Tromsø: University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Demirok, Ömer F.
2013Agree as a unidirectional operation: Evidence from Laz. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University MA thesis.Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den
1995Particles. On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
1994Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eren, Ömer
2016Spatial prefixes of Pazar Laz: A nano-syntactic approach. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University MA thesis.Google Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio
2007The exhaustive lexicalisation principle. Nordlyd 34. 165–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Felix, Ameka F., Carlien de Witte & David Wilkins
1999Picture series for positional verbs: Eliciting the verbal component in locative descriptions. In David Wilkins (ed.), Manual for the 1999 field season, 48–54. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Folli, Raffaella & Gillian Ramchand
2005Prepositions and results in Italian and English: An analysis from event decomposition. In Henk J. Verkuyl, Henriette De Swart & Angeliek van Hout (eds.), Perspectives on aspect, 81–105. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gehrke, Berit
2008Ps in motion: On the semantics and syntax of P elements and motion events. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Holisky, Dee A.
1991Laz. In Alice. C. Harris (ed.), The Indigenous languages of the Caucasus: The Kartvelian languages. Delmar, NY: Caravan Books.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda
2000The syntax of specifiers and heads. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kutscher, Silvia
2011On the expression of spatial relations in Ardesen-Laz. Linguistic Discovery 9. 49–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lacroix, René
2009Description de dialecte Laze d’Arhavi (caucaasique du sud), Turquie, grammaire et textes. Lyon: University Lyon dissertation.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth
1993English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McIntyre, Andrew
2002Idiosyncrasy in particle verbs. In Nicole Dehé, Ray Jackendoff, Andrew McIntyre & Silke Urban (eds.), Verb-particle explorations, 95–118. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Öztürk, Balkız
2010Subjects in Pazar and Ardeshen Laz. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 2. 33–50.Google Scholar
2019The loss of case system in Ardeshen Laz and its morphosyntactic consequences. STUF: Language Typology and Universals 72(2). 193–219.Google Scholar
Öztürk, Balkız & Markus A. Pöchtrager
(eds.) 2011Pazar Laz. Münich: LINCOM: Languages of the World Materials.Google Scholar
Öztürk, Balkız & Eser. E. Taylan
2017Omnipresent little vP in Pazar Laz. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Angel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain, 207–232. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pantcheva, Marina B.
2011Decomposing path: The nanosyntax of directional expressions. Tromsø: University of Tromsø dissertation.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
2008aVerb meaning and the lexicon: A first phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008bLexical items in complex predications: Selection as Underassociation. Nordlyd 35. 115–141. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Riemsdijk, Henk van
1990Functional prepositions. In Harm Pinkster and Inge Genée (eds.), Unity in diversity, 229–241. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Son, Minjeong
2009Linguistic variation and lexical parameter: The case of directed motion. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 15(1). 213–222.Google Scholar
Son, Minjeong & Peter Svenonius
2008Microparameters of cross-linguistic variation: Directed motion and resultatives. Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 388–396.Google Scholar
Svenonius, Peter
2006The emergence of axial parts. Nordlyd 33. 49–77.Google Scholar
2007Adpositions, particles and the arguments they introduce. In Eric Reuland, Tanmoy Bhattacharya & Giorgos Spathas (eds.), Argument Structure, 63–103. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Spatial P in English. In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping spatial PPs: The cartography of syntactic structure, 127–161. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
2000aToward a cognitive semantics: Concept structuring systems, vol. 1, Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000bToward a cognitive semantics: Typology and process in concept structuring, vol. 2, Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Taylan, Eser E. & Balkız Öztürk
2014Transitivity in Pazar Laz. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61. 271–296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zubizarreta, Maria L. & Eunjeong Oh
2007On the syntactic composition of manner and motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar