Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Variation
Vol. 15:2 (2015) ► pp.225–290

Connectivity in left-dislocation and the composition of the left periphery

This paper proposes a crosslinguistically uniform analysis of Left-dislocation constructions, according to which left-dislocated XPs are elliptical sentence fragments surfacing in linear juxtaposition to their host clause. The analysis is shown to provide a principled solution to Cinque’s Paradox: dislocated XPs are extra-sentential constituents akin to parentheticals while behaving in certain respects as having moved to their surface position from within the host clause, in apparent violation of the boundaries of “sentence grammar” as typically defined. The solution in terms of deletion and endorphoric linkage undermines templatic analyses of the ‘cartographic’ tradition, showing that in at least some cases the “sentential periphery” reflects not syntactic composition but juxtaposition in discourse.
Keywords: dislocation, ellipsis, syntax, connectivity
Published online: 28 January 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.15.2.04ott
References (169)
Abels, Klaus. 2012. The Italian left periphery: A view from locality. Linguistic Inquiry 431. 229–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adger, David, Cécile de Cat & George Tsoulas (eds.). 2004. Peripheries. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis. 2006. Left-dislocation (including CLLD). In Everaert & van Riemsdijk (eds.), 668–699. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexopoulou, Theodora, Edit Doron & Caroline Heycock. 2004. Broad subjects and clitic left-dislocation. In Adger et al. (eds.), 329–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1994. Clitic dependencies in Modern Greek. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Salzburg.
. 1997. Clitic left-dislocation and contrastive left-dislocation. In Anagnostopoulou et al. (eds.), 151–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, Elena, Henk van Riemsdijk & Frans Zwarts (eds.). 1997. Materials on left-dislocation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aoun, Joseph & Elabbas Benmamoun. 1998. Minimality, reconstruction, and PF-movement. Linguistic Inquiry 291. 569–597. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arnaudova, Olga. 2002. Clitic left-dislocation and argument structure in Bulgarian. In Jindřich Toman (ed.), Proceedings of FASL 101, 23–46. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Arregi, Karlos. 2003. Clitic left-dislocation is contrastive topicalization. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 91. 31–44.Google Scholar
. 2010. Ellipsis in split questions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 281. 539–592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon & George M. Horn. 1976. Remarks on “conditions on transformations”. Linguistic Inquiry 71. 265–299.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 1996. On the structural position of themes and goals. In J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 7–34. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark C. 2001. The natures of nonconfigurationality. In Mark R. Baltin & Chris Collins (eds.), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 407–438. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barbosa, Pilar. 1995. Null subjects. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT. DOI logo
. 2000. Clitics: A window into the null-subject property. In João Costa (ed.), Essays in Portuguese comparative syntax, 31–93. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barros, Matthew, Patrick D. Elliott & Gary Thoms. 2014. There is no island repair. Ms., Rutgers University, University College London and University of Edinburgh.
Belletti, Adriana. 2006. Extending doubling to non-local domains: Complete vs. partial copying + deletion and related reconstruction issues. In Brandt & Fuß (eds.), 129–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benincà, Paola. 2001. The position of topic and focus in the left periphery. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current studies in Italian syntax, 39–64. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola & Cecilia Poletto. 2004. Topic, focus, and V2: Defining the CP sublayers. In Luigi Rizzi (ed.), The structure of CP and IP, 52–75. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa & Marc Richards. 2006. True optionality: When the grammar doesn’t mind. In Cedric Boeckx (ed.), Minimalist essays, Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics today, vol. 911, 35–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 1999. Adverbs: The hierarchy paradox. GLOT International 41. 27–28.Google Scholar
Bocci, Giuliano. 2007. Criterial positions and left periphery in Italian. Nanzan Linguistics 31. 35–70.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2003. Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1984. Parametric syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brandt, Patrick & Eric Fuß (eds.). 2006. Form, structure, and grammar. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan & Sam A. Mchombo. 1987. Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chicheŵa. Language 631. 741–782. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin. 2015. Non-constituent coordination: Prosody, not movement. UPenn Working Papers in Linguistics 211. article 5.
Brunetti, Lisa. 2003. ‘Information’ focus movement in Italian and contextual constraints on ellipsis. In Gina Garding & Mimu Tsujimura (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 221, 95–108. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel. 2013. Syntax, information structure, and prosody. In Marcel den Dikken (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of generative syntax, 860–896. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna. 1997. Subjects and clause structure. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), The new comparative syntax, 33–63. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Michal Starke. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: On the three grammatical classes. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, 145–234. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cecchetto, Carlo. 2000. Doubling structures and reconstruction. Probus 121. 93–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen & Laura J. Downing. 2009. Where’s the topic in Zulu? The Linguistic Review 261. 207–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On W H-movement. In Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow, & Adrian Akmajian (eds.), Formal syntax, 71–132. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Michael Ken-stowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Uli Sauerland & Hans-Martin Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? 1–29. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Howard Lasnik. 1993. The theory of principles and parameters. In Joachim Jacobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld, & Theo Vennemann (eds.), Syntax, 506–569. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 2013. Syntactic identity in sluicing: How much and why. Linguistic Inquiry 441. 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1983. ‘Topic’ constructions in some European languages and ‘connectedness’. In Konrad Ehlich & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Connectedness in sentence, discourse and text, 7–41. Tilburg: KUB.Google Scholar
. 1990. Types of A-bar dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Luigi Rizzi. 2009. The cartography of syntactic structures. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 51–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, Chris. 1997. Local economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (ed.). 2009. Alternatives to cartography. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Ellipsis, identity, and accomodation. Ms., HU Brussels/KU Leuven.
Cruschina, Silvio. 2010. Syntactic extraposition and clitic resumption in Italian. Lingua 1201. 50–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Cat, Cécile. 2007. French dislocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole & Yordanka Kavalova. 2007. Parentheticals: An introduction. In Nicole Dehé & Yordanka Kavalova (eds.), Parentheticals, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Del Gobbo, Francesca. 2003. Appositives at the interfaces. Irvine: Doctoral Dissertation, University of California.Google Scholar
Demirdache, Hamida. 1991. Resumptive chains in restrictive relatives, appositives, and dislocation structures. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.
den Dikken, Marcel, André Meinunger & Chris Wilder. 2000. Pseudoclefts and ellipsis. Studia Linguistica 541. 41–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dewald, Anika. 2012. Spontansprachliche Versetzungsstrukturen im Deutschen. Doctoral Disser-tation, University of Cologne.
Dobashi, Yoshihito. 2003. Phonological phrasing and syntactic derivation. Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University.
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen. 1990. Clitic-doubling, wh-movement and quantification in Romanian. Linguistic Inquiry 211. 351–397.Google Scholar
Downing, Bruce T. 1970. Syntactic structure and phonological phrasing in English. Austin: Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas.
Downing, Laura J. 2011. The prosody of ‘dislocation’ in selected Bantu languages. Lingua 1211. 772–786. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emonds, Joseph. 2004. Unspecified categories as the key to root constructions. In Adger et al. (eds.), 75–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Escobar, Linda. 1997. Clitic left-dislocation and other relatives. In Anagnostopoulou et al. (eds.), 233–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Everaert, Martin & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.). 2006. The Blackwell companion to syntax. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert. 2006. On pure syntax. In Brandt & Fuß (eds.), 137–158.Google Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert, Reinhold Kliegl & Matthias Schlesewsky. 2005. Syntactic variation in German wh-questions: Empirical investigations of weak-crossover violations and long wh-movement. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 51. 37–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert & Denisa Lenertová. 2011. Left peripheral focus: Mismatches between syntax and information structure. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 291. 169–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feldhausen, Ingo. 2008. The prosody–syntax interface in Catalan. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Potsdam.
. 2014. The intonation of left-dislocations in Spanish and other Romance languages. Habilitation thesis, University of Frankfurt.
Fiengo, Robert & Robert May. 1994. Indices and identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Frascarelli, Mara. 1997. The phonology of focus and topic in Italian. The Linguistic Review 141. 221–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. The syntax–phonology interface in focus and topic constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frey, Werner. 1993. Syntaktische Bedingungen für die semantische Interpretation. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2004. Notes on the syntax and the pragmatics of German left-dislocation. In Horst Lohnstein & Susanne Trissler (eds.), The syntax and semantics of the left periphery, 203–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Comparing remarks on German left-dislocation and Italian Clitic left-dislocation. Paper presented at the Workshop on Information Structure in the Theory of Grammar and in Language Acquisition, University of Lund, September 19 2009.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2000. Negative… concord? Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 181. 457–523. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grewendorf, Günther. 2008. The left clausal periphery: Clitic left-dislocation in Italian and left-dislocation in German. In Shaer et al. (eds.), 49–94.Google Scholar
Grohmann, Kleanthes K. 2003. Prolific domains. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guentchéva, Zlatka. 2008. Object clitic-doubling constructions and topicality in Bulgarian. In Kallulli & Tasmowski (eds.), 203–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Haaften, Ton, Rik Smits & Jan Vat. 1983. Left-dislocation, connectedness, and reconstruction. In Werner Abraham (ed.), On the formal syntax of the West Germania, 133–154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1991. Parenthetical adverbials: The radical orphanage approach. In Shuki Chiba, Akira Ogawa, Yasuaki Fuiwara, Norio Yamada, Osamu Koma, & Takao Yagi (eds.), Aspects of modern English linguistics, 232–254. Toyko: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Halpern, Aaron L. 1998. Clitics. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 101–122. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hamlaoui, Fatima & Emmanuel-Moselly Makasso. 2013. Object left-dislocation, topicalization and the syntax–phonology mapping of intonation phrases in Bàsàá. Ms., ZAS Berlin.
Heycock, Caroline. 2006. Embedded root phenomena. In Everaert & van Riemsdijk (eds.), 174–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoekstra, Eric. 1999. On D-pronouns and the movement of topic features. Folia Linguistica 331. 59–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2015. Verb-second. In Tibor Kiss & Artemis Alexiadou (eds.), Syntax, 342–383. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine. 1995. Clitics and island effects. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 21. 11–30.Google Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine & Anthony S. Kroch. 1992. The licensing of CP-recursion and its relevance to the Germanic verb-second phenomenon. Working Papers in Scandinavian Linguistics 501. 1–25.Google Scholar
İnce, Atakan. 2012. Fragment answers and islands. Syntax 151. 181–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janse, Mark. 2008. Clitic doubling from Ancient to Asia Minor Greek. In Kallulli & Tasmowski (eds.), 165–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina & Liliane Tasmowski (eds.). 2008. Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanerva, Jonni M. 1990. Focusing on phonological phrases in Chichewa. In Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eds.), The phonology–syntax connection, 145–161. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 1975. French syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István & Irene Vogel. 1990. Focus and phonological structure. Paper presented at GLOW, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Koster, Jan. 1978. Why subject sentences don’t exist. In Samuel Jay Keyser (ed.), Recent transformational studies in European languages, 53–64. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Krapova, Iliyana. 2004. Word order in topic–focus structures in the Balkan languages. Venice: Ms., Università Ca’ Foscari.Google Scholar
Krapova, Iliyana & Guglielmo Cinque. 2008. Clitic reduplication constructions in Bulgarian. In Kallulli & Tasmowski (eds.), 257–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kučerová, Ivona & Ad Neeleman (eds.). 2012. Contrasts and positions in information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, Howard. 2001. When can you save a structure by destroying it? In Minjoo Kim & Uri Strauss (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 31, vol. 21, 301–320. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Lipták, Anikó. 2011. The structure of the topic field in Hungarian. In Paola Benincà & Nicola Munaro (eds.), Mapping the left periphery, 163–198. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipták, Anikó & Luis Vicente. 2009. Pronominal doubling under VP-topicalization. Lingua 1191. 650–686. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
López, Luis. 2003. Steps for a well-adjusted dislocation. Studia Linguistica 571. 193–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. A derivational syntax for information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. To appear. Dislocations. In Caroline Féry & Shin Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Manzini, Rita. 2010. The structure and interpretation of (Romance) complementizers. In Phoevos Panagiotidis (ed.), The complementizer phase. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2001. The syntax of silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2004a. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics & Philosophy 271. 661–738. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004b. Resumptivity and non-movement. Studies in Greek Linguistics 241. 471–481.Google Scholar
. To appear. Ellipsis: A survey of analytical approaches. In Jeroen van Craenenbroeck & Tanja Temmerman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mollica, Fabio. 2010. Korrelate im Deutschen und im Italienischen. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Morgan, Jerry. 1973. Sentence fragments and the notion “sentence”. In Braj Kachru, Robert Lees, Yakov Malkiel, Angelina Pietrangeli, & Sol Saporta (eds.), Issues in linguistics, 719–751. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Neeleman, Ad & Hans Van de Koot. 2008. Dutch scrambling and the nature of discourse templates. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 111. 137–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
Nilsen, Øystein. 2003. Eliminating positions: Syntax and semantics of sentence modification. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Utrecht.
Ott, Dennis. 2012a. Local instability: Split topicalization and quantifier float in German. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. Movement and ellipsis in contrastive left-dislocation. In Nathan Arnett & Ryan Bennett (eds.), Proceedings of WC-CFL 301, 281–291. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
. 2014. An ellipsis approach to Contrastive Left-dislocation. Linguistic Inquiry 451. 269–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Ellipsis in appositives. Ms., University of Ottawa.
Ott, Dennis & Edgar Onea. In press. On the form and meaning of appositives. In Proceedings of NELS 45. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
Ott, Dennis & Volker Struckmeier. In press. Deletion in clausal ellipsis: Remnants in the middle field. In Proceedings of PLC 39.
Ott, Dennis & Mark de Vries. 2014. A biclausal analysis of right-dislocation. In Hsin-Lun Huang, Ethan Poole, & Amanda Rysling (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 43, vol. 21, 41–54. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
. 2015. Right-dislocation as deletion. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory (online). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, Bum-Sik. 2005. Island-insensitive fragment answers in Korean. In John Alderete, Chung Hye Han, & Alexei Kochetov (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 241, 317–325. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2004. Topic and focus as linear notions: Evidence from Italian and Russian. Lingua 1141. 325–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peterson, Peter. 1999. On the boundaries of syntax. In Peter Collins & David Lee (eds.), The clause in English, 229–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia. 2002. The left periphery of V2 rhaetoromance dialects: A new view on V2 and V3. In Susanne van der Kleij, Sjef Barbiers, & Leonie Cornips (eds.), Syntactic microvariation, 214–242. Amsterdam: The Meertens Institute.Google Scholar
Raposo, Eduardo E. 1996. Towards a unfication of topic constructions. Santa Barbara: Ms., University of California.Google Scholar
Repp, Sophie & Heiner Drenhaus. 2015. Intonation influences processing and recall of left-dislocation sentences by indicating topic vs. focus status of dislocated referent. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 301. 324–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1997. Left-dislocation. In Anagnostopoulou et al. (eds.), 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Locality and left periphery. In Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and beyond, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rochemont, Michael S. 1989. Topic islands and the subjacency parameter. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 341. 145–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodman, Robert. 1997. On left-dislocation. In Anagnostopoulou et al. (eds.), 31–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.
. 1969. Guess who? In Robert I. Binnick, Alice Davison, Georgia M. Green, & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Papers from the fifth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 252–286. Chicago: CLS.Google Scholar
. 1973a. A fake NP squish. In Charles-James N. Bailey & Roger W. Shuy (eds.), New ways of analyzing variation in English, 96–140. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
. 1973b. Slifting. In Maurice Gross, Morris Hell, & Marcel Schützenberger (eds.), The formal analysis of natural languages, 133–169. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1986. Infinite syntax! Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
Roussou, Anna. 2010. Selecting complementizers. Lingua 1201. 582–603. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubio, Carlos. 2012. Topics first: A derivational approach to CLLD topicalization in Romance. Paper presented at Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 42, Southern Utah University.
Rullmann, Hotze & Jan-Wouter Zwart. 1996. On saying dat . In Language and cognition 5. Year- book 1995 of the Research Group of Theoretical and Experimental Linguistics of the University of Groningen, 179–194. Groningen: University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 2006. When right-dislocation meets the left periphery. A unified analysis of Italian non-final focus. Lingua 1161. 836–873. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2001. Syntax–phonology interface. In Bernard Comrie (ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, 15407–15412. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Sentence phonology. In William Frawley & William Bright (eds.), International encyclopedia of linguistics, 41–42. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Comments on international phrases in English. In Sónia Frota, Marina Vigário, & Maria João Freitas (eds.), Prosodies, 11–58. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2011. The syntax–phonology interface. In John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle, & Alan C.L. Yu (eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 435–484. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sells, Peter. 1984. Syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns. Amherst: Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts.
Shaer, Benjamin, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey, & Claudia Maienborn (eds.). 2008. Dislocated elements in discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shaer, Benjamin & Werner Frey. 2004. “Integrated” and “non-integrated” left-peripheral elements in German and English. In Benjamin Shaer, Werner Frey, & Claudia Maienborn (eds.), Proceedings of the dislocated elements workshop, 465–502. Berlin: Zentrum für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Sturgeon, Anne. 2008a. The left periphery. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008b. Resumption in Czech left-dislocation: The syntax–phonology interface. In Andrei Antonenko, John F. Bailyn, & Christina Y. Bethin (eds.), Proceedings of FASL 161, 407–422. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Suñer, Margarita. 2003. The lexical preverbal subject in a Romance null-subject language: Where are thou? In Rafael Núñez-Cedeño, Luis López, & Richard Cameron (eds.), A Romance perspective on language knowledge and use, 341–358. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Left-dislocations with and without epithets. Probus 181. 127–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taglicht, Josef. 1998. Constraints on international phrasing in English. Journal of Linguistics 341. 181–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Temmerman, Tanja. 2013. The syntax of Dutch embedded fragment answers: On the PF-theory of islands and the WH/sluicing correlation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 311. 235–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2007. The syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo
Torrego, Esther. 1984. On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects. Linguistic Inquiry 151. 103–129.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1999. On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 301. 219–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Intonation phrases and speech acts. In Marlies Kluck, Dennis Ott, & Mark de Vries (eds.), Parenthesis and ellipsis, 301–349. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tsakali, Vina & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 2008. Rethinking the clitic-doubling parameter: The inverse correlation between clitic doubling and participle agreement. In Kallulli & Tasmowski (eds.), 321–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vallduví, Enric. 2002. L’oració com a unitat informativa. In Joan Sol‘a, Maria-Rosa Lloret, Joan Mascaró, & Manuel Pérez Saldanya (eds.), Gramàtica del Català contempo-rani, 1221–1279. Barcelona: Editorial Empúries.Google Scholar
van der Spuy, Andrew. 1993. Dislocated noun phrases in Nguni. Lingua 901. 335–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1995. Verb movement and expletive subjects in the Germanic languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Villa-García, Julio. 2012. Recomplementation and locality of movement in Spanish. Probus 241. 257–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Villalba, Xavier. 2000. The syntax of sentence periphery. Doctoral Dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
de Vries, Mark. 2007. Invisible constituents? Parentheses as b-merged adverbial phrases. In Nicole Dehé & Yordanka Kavalova (eds.), Parentheticals, 203–234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wagner, Michael. 2012. Contrastive topics decomposed. Semantics and Pragmatics 51. 1–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiltschko, Martina. 1997a. Extraposition, identification, and precedence. In Dorothee Beermann, David LeBlanc, & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Rightward movement, 357–395. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997b. Parasitic operators in German left-dislocations. In Anagnostopoulou et al. (eds.), 307–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zaenen, Annie. 1997. Contrastive dislocation in Dutch and Icelandic. In Anagnostopoulou et al. (eds.), 119–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeller, Jochen. 2004. Left-dislocation in Zulu. Ms., University of KwaZulu-Natal.
. 2006. On clitic left-dislocation in Zulu. Frankfurter Afrikanistische Blätter 181. 131–156.Google Scholar
Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 2009. Uncharted territory? Towards a non-cartographic account of Germanic syntax. In Artemis Alexiadou, Jorge Hankamer, Thomas McFadden, Justin Nuger, & Florian Schäfer (eds.), Advances in comparative Germanic syntax, 59–83. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (15)

Cited by 15 other publications

Alzayid, Ali
2024. On the Parataxis of Arabic split questions. Syntax DOI logo
VILLA-GARCÍA, JULIO & DENNIS OTT
2024. Recomplementation as a paratactic phenomenon: Evidence from Spanish and English. Journal of Linguistics 60:1 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Jung, Wonsuk
2023. THE SYNTAX OF TWO TYPES OF GAPPING IN SPANISH*. Studia Linguistica 77:1 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Rodríguez Ramalle, Teresa María
2023. Evidential Adverbs and Polarity: A Study from Spanish. Languages 8:4 ► pp. 243 ff. DOI logo
Suárez-Palma, Imanol
2023. Middle-Passive Constructions, Dative Possessors, and Word Order in Spanish. Languages 9:1 ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
Cruschina, Silvio
2022. Topicalization, Dislocation and Clitic Resumption. Studia Linguistica 76:2 ► pp. 354 ff. DOI logo
BASSONG, PAUL ROGER
2021. Mismatching nominals and the small clause hypothesis. Journal of Linguistics 57:4 ► pp. 737 ff. DOI logo
Fernández‐Sánchez, Javier & Dennis Ott
2020. Dislocations. Language and Linguistics Compass 14:9 DOI logo
Abels, Klaus
2019. On “sluicing” with apparent massive pied-piping. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37:4 ► pp. 1205 ff. DOI logo
De Clercq, Karen & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd
2019. Negation and the functional sequence. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37:2 ► pp. 425 ff. DOI logo
Villa-García, Julio
2019. Recomplementation in English and Spanish: Delineating the CP space. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4:1 DOI logo
Villa-García, Julio
2023. Hanging Topic Left Dislocations as extrasentential constituents: toward a paratactic account. Evidence from English and Spanish. The Linguistic Review 40:2 ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo
Ott, Dennis
2018. VP-fronting: Movement vs. dislocation. The Linguistic Review 0:0 DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Right Peripheral Fragments [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 258], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Arabic Dislocation [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 271], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.