Article published in:
Linguistic Variation
Vol. 14:2 (2014) ► pp. 243288
References

References

Adger, David & Daniel Harbour
2007Syntax and syncretisms of the Person Case Constraint. Syntax 10. 2–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aissen, Judith
1999Markedness and subject choice in Optimality Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17. 673–711. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 435–483. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, Elena
2003The syntax of ditransitives: Evidence from clitics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005Strong and weak person restrictions: A feature checking analysis. In Lorie Heggie & Francisco Ordóñez (eds.), Clitic and affix combinations: Theoretical perspectives, 199–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arregi, Karlos & Andrew Nevins
2012Morphotactics: Basque auxiliaries and the structure of Spellout. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Béjar, Susana
2003Phi-syntax: A theory of agreement. University of Toronto dissertation.
Béjar, Susana & Milan Rezac
2009Cyclic agree. Linguistic Inquiry 40. 35–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan
1993Ergativity and ergative unergatives. In Colin Phillips (ed.), Papers on case and agreement II, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 19, 45–88. Cambridge, MA: MIT, MITWPL.Google Scholar
2002Syncretism without paradigms: Remarks on Williams 1981, 1994. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2001, 53–85. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bonet, Eulàlia
1991Morphology after syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Bossong, Georg
1985Differenzielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Brown, Jason, Karsten Koch & Martina Wiltschko
2004The person hierarchy: Primitive or epiphenomenal? Evidence from Halkomelem Salish. In Keir Moulton & Matthew Wolf (eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 34), 147–162. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Butt, Miriam
2005Theories of case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carstens, Vicki
2013Delayed valuation: A reanalysis of “upward” complementizer agreement and the mechanics of Case, Ms., University of Missouri, to appear in Syntax.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
2000Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays in syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1979Definite and animate direct objects: A natural class. Linguistica silesiana 3. 13–21.Google Scholar
1984Reflections on verb agreement in Hindi and related languages. Linguistics 22. 857–864. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coon, Jessica
2010Complementation in Chol (Mayan): A theory of split ergativity. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
2012Split ergativity and transitivity in Chol. Lingua 122. 241–256. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013aAspects of split ergativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013bTAM split ergativity: Part 1. Language and Linguistics Compass 7. 171–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coon, Jessica & Omer Preminger
2012Towards a unified account of person splits. In Jaehoon Choi, E. Alan Hogue, Jeffrey Punske, Deniz Tat, Jessamyn Schertz & Alex Trueman (eds.), Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 29), 310–318. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William
1988Agreement vs. case marking and direct objects. In Michael Barlow & Charles Ferguson (eds.), Agreement in natural language: Approaches, theories, descriptions, 159–179. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Deo, Ashwini & Devyani Sharma
2006Typological variation in the ergative morphology of Indo-Aryan languages. Linguistic Typology 10. 369–418. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
1972The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1979Ergativity. Language 55. 59–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Embick, David & Rolf Noyer
2001Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32. 555–595. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Distributed Morphology and the syntax/morphology interface. In Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of linguistic interfaces, 289–324. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frampton, John
2002Syncretism, impoverishment, and the structure of person features. In Mary Andronis, Erin Debenport, Anne Pycha & Keiko Yoshimura (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 38), 207–222. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Frampton, John & Sam Gutmann
2000Agreement is feature sharing, Ms., Northeastern University.
Gazdar, Gerald, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey Pullum & Ivan Sag
1985Generalized phrase structure grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, Patrick & Pritty Patel
2006Long distance agreement and restructuring predicates in Kutchi Gujarati, Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Hale, Ken
1972A new perspective on American Indian linguistics. In Alfonso Ortiz (ed.), New perspectives on the Pueblos, 87–103. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris
1997Distributed morphology: Impoverishment and fission. In Benjamin Bruening, Yoonjung Kang & Martha McGinnis (eds.), Papers at the Interface, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30, 425–449. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL. Republished 2000 in: Research in Afroasiatic grammar: Papers from the third Conference on Afroasiatic Languages, eds. Jacqueline Lecarme, Jean Lowenstein & Ur Shlonsky, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 125–151.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz
1993Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1994Some key features of Distributed Morphology. In Andrew Carnie, Heidi Harley & Tony Bures (eds.), Papers on phonology and morphology, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21, 275–288. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Hanson, Rebecca
2000Pronoun acquisition and the morphological feature geometry. In Ilana Mezhevich & Michael Dobrovolsky (eds.), Calgary working papers in linguistics, 1–14. Calgary: Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi
1994Hug a tree: Deriving the morphosyntactic feature hierarchy. In Andrew Carnie & Heidi Harley (eds.), Papers on phonology and morphology, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 22, 275–288. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Rolf Noyer
2003Distributed Morphology. In Lisa Cheng & Rint Sybesma (eds.), The second GLOT international state-of-the-article book, 463–496. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Elisabeth Ritter
2002aPerson and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78. 482–526. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Elizabeth Ritter
2002bStructuring the bundle: A universal morpho-syntactic feature geometry. In Horst Simon & Heike Wiese (eds.), Pronouns: Features and representations, 23–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heck, Fabian & Marc Richards
2010A probe-goal approach to agreement and non-incorporation restrictions in Southern Tiwa. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28. 681–721. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hook, Peter
1978The Hindi compound verb: What it is and what it does. In Kripa Shanker Singh (ed.), Readings in Hindi-Urdu linguistics, 129–154. New Delhi: National Publishing House.Google Scholar
Keine, Stefan
2010Case and agreement from fringe to core: A minimalist approach. Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keine, Stefan & Gereon Müller
2011Non-zero/non-zero alternations in differential object marking. In Suzi Lima, Kevin Mullin & Brian Smith (eds.), Proceedings of the 39th North East Linguistic Society (NELS 39), 441–454. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar
Laka, Itziar
1993Unergatives that assign ergative, unaccusatives that assign accusative. In Jonathan Bobaljik & Colin Phillips (eds.), Papers on case and agreement I, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 149–172. Cambridge, MA: MIT, MITWPL.Google Scholar
2006Deriving split-ergativity in the progressive. In Alana Jones, Diane Massam & Juvenal Ndayiradije (eds.), Ergativity: Emerging issues, 173–196. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert
1984Actance variations and categories of the object. In Frans Plank (ed.), Objects: Towards a theory of grammatical relations, 269–292. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne
2005Phases and cyclic agreement. In Martha McGinnis & Norvin Richards (eds.), Perspectives on phases, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 49, 147–156. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Li, Chao
2007Split ergativity and split intransitivity in Nepali. Lingua 117. 1462–1482. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Magier, David
1983Topics in the grammar of Marwari. University of California, Berkeley dissertation.
Mahajan, Anoop
2012Ergatives, antipassives and the overt light v in Hindi. Lingua 122. 204–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec
1991Case and licensing. In German Westphal, Benjamin Ao & Hee-Rahk Chae (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL 8), 234–253. University of Maryland. Reprinted 2000 in: Arguments and Case: Explaining Burzio’s Generalization, ed. by Eric Reuland, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 11–30.
Noyer, Rolf
1992Features, positions, and affixes in autonomous morphological structure. MIT, Cambridge, MA dissertation.
1997Features, positions and affixes in autonomous morphological structure. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
Pandharipande, Rajeshwari
1997Marathi. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pandharipande, Rajeshwari & Yamuna Kachru
1977Relational grammar, ergativity, and Hindi-Urdu. Lingua 41. 217–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Patel-Grosz, Pritty & Patrick Grosz
2013Structural asymmetries: The view from Kutchi Gujarati and Marwari, Ms., Universität Tubingen. Crossref
2014Agreement and verb types in Kutchi Gujarati. In Pritha Chandra & Richa Srishti (eds.), The lexicon-syntax interface: Views from South Asian languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, David & Esther Torrego
2007The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Simin Karimi, Vida Samilan, Wendy Wilkins & Joseph Emonds (eds.), Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pollard, Carl J. & Ivan A. Sag
1994Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Preminger, Omer
2011Agreement as a fallible operation. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Rezac, Milan
2004Elements of cyclic syntax: Agree and Merge. University of Toronto dissertation.
2008The syntax of eccentric agreement: The person case constraint and absolutive displacement in Basque. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26. 61–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richards, Marc
2004Object shift and scrambling in North and West Germanic: A case study in symmetrical syntax. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge dissertation.Google Scholar
2008Quirky expletives. In Roberta d’Alessandro, Susann Fischer & Gunnar H. Hrafnbjargarson (eds.), Agreement restrictions, 181–213. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1990On the anaphor agreement effect. Rivista di Linguistica 2. 27–42.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann
2006Agree in syntax, agreement in signs. In Cedric Boeckx (ed.), Agreement systems, 201–237. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
1976Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, David
1989Mparntwe Arrernte (Aranda): Studies in the structure and semantics of grammar. Canberra: Australian National University dissertation.Google Scholar
Wiltschko, Martina
2006On ‘ergativity’ in Halkomelem Salish. In Alana Johns, Diane Massam & Juvenal Ndayiragije (eds.), Ergativity: Emerging issues, 197–227. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Person hierarchy effects without a person hierarchy. In Roberta d’Alessandro, Susann Fischer & Gunnar H. Hrafnbjargarson (eds.), Agreement restrictions, 281–314. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Woolford, Ellen
1999More on the anaphor agreement effect. Linguistic Inquiry 30. 257–287. CrossrefGoogle Scholar