Article published in:
The locus of linguistic variation
Edited by Constantine Lignos, Laurel MacKenzie and Meredith Tamminga
[Linguistic Variation 16:2] 2016
► pp. 267299
References

References

Abeillé, A. & D. Godard
1996La complémentation des auxiliaires en français. Langages 122. 32–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997The syntax of French negative adverbs. In D. Forget (ed.), Negation and polarity: syntax and semantics, 1–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002The syntactic structure of French auxiliaries. Language 78. 404–452. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Adger, D.
2014Variability and grammatical architecture. In C. Picallo (ed.), Linguistic variation in the minimalist framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Adger, D. & J. Smith
2010Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach. Lingua 120. 1109–1134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barwise, J. & R. Cooper
1981Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4. 159–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blutner, R.
2000Some aspects of optimality in natural language semantics. Journal of Semantics 17. 189–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blutner, R., P. Hendriks & de H. Hoop
2003A new hypothesis on compositionality. Proceedings of ICCS 2003, 53–57.Google Scholar
Boersma, P.
1998Functional Phonology. Formalizing the interaction between articulatory and perceptual drives. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. & B. Hayes
2001Empirical tests of the gradual learning algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32. 45–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P. & D. Weenik
2014Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.3.80, retrieved 29 June 2014. from http://​www​.praat​.org/.Google Scholar
Borsley, R. & B. Jones
2005Welsh negation and grammatical theory. University of Wales Press, Cardiff.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J.
2000Optimal syntax. In F. v. d. L. Joost Dekkers & J. van de Weijer (eds.), Optimality theory: Phonology, syntax and acquisition, 334–385. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2007A few lessons from typology. Linguistic Typology 11. 297–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, J., A. Cueni, T. Nikitina & H. Baayen
2007Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Boume, I. Kraemer, & J. Zwarts (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Royal Netherlands Academy of Science, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J., S. Dingare & C. Manning
2001Soft constraints mirror hard constraints: Voice and person in English and Lummi. In M. Butt & T. King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Burnett, H., M. Tremblay & H. Blondeau
2015The variable grammar of Montréal French negative concord. In S. Fisher (ed.), Penn working papers in linguistics, volume 21. University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Chambers, J.
2004Dynamic typology and vernacular universals. In B. Kortmann (ed.), Dialectology meets typology: Dialect grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective, 127–145. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
1957Syntactic structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1965Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1995The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Comeau, P.
2011A window on the past, a move towards the future: Sociolinguistic and formal perspectives on variation in Acadian French. Ph.D. thesis, York University.Google Scholar
Corblin, F. & L. Tovena
2003L’expression de la négation dans les langues romanes. In D. Godard (ed.), Les langues romanes: problèmes de la phrase simple, 279–242. Paris: CNRS Publications.Google Scholar
Daoust-Blais, D.
1975L’influence de la négation sur certains indéfinis en français québécois. Ph.D. thesis, Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar
de Hoop, H. & H. de Swart
2000Adjunct clauses in optimality theory. Revista di Linguistica/Italian Journal of Linguistics 12. 107–127.Google Scholar
de Swart, H.
2010Expression and interpretation of negation: An OT Typology. Springer, Dordrecht. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Swart, H. & I. Sag
2002Negation and negative concord in Romance. Linguistics & Philosophy 25. 373–415. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
den Besten, H.
1986Double negation and the genesis of Afrikaans. In P. Muysken & N. Smith (eds.), Substrata versus universals in Creole languages, 185–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Déprez, V.
2002Concordance négative, syntaxe des mots-N et variation dialectale. Cahiers de linguistique française 25. 97–117.Google Scholar
Déprez, V. & F. Martineau
2004Pour use analyse microparametrique de la concordance négative. In F. Corblin, S. Ferrando, & L. Kupferman (eds.), Indéfinis et prédications. Presses Universitaires Paris-Sorbonne.Google Scholar
Deshaies, D. & E. Laforge
1981Le futur simple et le futur proche dans le français parlé dans la ville de québec. Langues et Linguistique 7. 21–37.Google Scholar
Eckert, P.
2008Variation and the indexical field. Journal of sociolinguistics 12. 453–476. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A.
2006N-words and negative concord. In M. Everaert (ed.), Blackwell companion to syntax (Volume 3), 327–391. Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, T.
1979On understanding grammar. Academic, New York.Google Scholar
Godfrey, J., E. Holliman & J. McDaniel
1992Switchboard: Telephone speech corpus for research and development. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing , 517–520, San Francisco. Crossref
Grimshaw, J.
1997Projection, heads and optimality. Linguistic inquiry 28. 373–422.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J.
2004Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, P. & de H. Hoop
2001Optimality theoretic semantics. Linguistics and philosophy 24. 1–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horn, L.
1989A natural history of negation. California: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Jäger, G.
2002Some notes on the formal properties of bidirectional Optimality Theory. Journal of logic, language and information 11. 427–451. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Learning constraint sub-hierarchies: the bidirectional gradual learning algorithm. In R. Blutner & H. Zeevat (eds.), Optimality theory and pragmatics, 217–242. Palgrave McMillan.Google Scholar
Jelinek, E. & R. Demers
1983The agent hierarchy and voice in some Coast Salish languages. International journal of american linguistics 49. 167–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O.
1917Negation in English and other languages. Horst, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
1933Essentials of English grammar. Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & B. Comrie
1977Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 63–99.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & S. Hawkins
1987The psychological validity of the accessibility hierarchy. In E. Keenan (ed.), Universal grammar: 15 essays. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & J. Stavi
1986A semantic characterization of natural language determiners. Linguistics and Philosophy 9. 253–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, E. & D. Westerstahl
1997Generalized quantifiers in linguistics and logic. In van J. Benthem & ter A. Meulen (eds.), Handbook of logic and language, 837–893. Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M.
2007Approximate interpretation of number words: A case for strategic communication. In G. Bouma, I. Kräer & J. Zwarts (eds.), Creative foundations of interpretation, 111–126. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschapen, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kroch, A.
2000Syntactic change. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (eds.), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 699–729. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labelle, M.
2010Negative words and negation in french. In Larrivée, P. & R. Ingham (eds.), The evolution of negation: Beyond the jespersen cycle. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Labov, W.
1963The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19. 273–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1966The social stratification of English in New York City. Center for Applied Linguistics, Arlington.Google Scholar
Laka, I.
1990Negation in Syntax. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
Larrivée, P.
2014The continuity of the vernacular. In M.-B Mosegaard Hansen & J. Visconti (eds.), The Diachrony of negation, 253–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lemieux, M.
1985Pas rien. In M. Lemieux & H. Cedegren (eds.), Les tendances dynamiques du français parlé à Montréal, 91–140. Office de la langue française.Google Scholar
May, R.
1985Logical Form. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Merchant, J.
2004Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and philosophy 27. 661–738. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Montague, R.
1970English as a formal language. In B. Visentini (ed.), Linguaggi nella societa e nella tecnica, 189–224. Milan: Edizioni di Communita.Google Scholar
Muller, C.
1991La négation en français. Droz, Geneva.Google Scholar
Penka, D. & H. Zeijlstra
2010Negation and polarity: an introduction. Natural language and linguistic theory 28. 771–786. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peters, S. & D. Westerstahl
2006Quantifiers in language and logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pollock, J.-Y.
1989Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic inquiry 20. 365–424.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. & N. Dion
2009Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language 85. 557–587. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. & D. Turpin
1999Does the futur have a future in (canadian) french? Probus 11. 133–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Prince, A. & P. Smolensky
1993Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University center for cognitive science technical report, 2.Google Scholar
Rosenbach, A.
2002Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language 81. 613–644. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, G. & D. Vincent
1977L’emploi productif de ne dans le français parlé à montréal. Le Français moderne 45. 243–256.Google Scholar
Sciullo, A.-M.D. & M. Tremblay
1996Configurations et interprétations: les morphèmes de la négation. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 25. 27–52.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. & F. Keller
2005Gradience in linguistic data. Lingua 115. 1497–1524. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stabler, E.
2013Two models of minimalist, incremental syntactic analysis. Trends in cognitive science 5. 611–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S.
2011Variation as a window on universals. In P. Siemund (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014A comparative sociolinguistic analysis of the dative alternation. In Torres-Cacoullos, R., N. Dion & A. Lapierre (eds.), Linguistic variation: Confronting fact and theory. Routledge, London and New York (to appear).Google Scholar
Thibault, P. & D. Vincent
1990Un corpus de français parlé: Montréal 84. Université Laval, Québec.Google Scholar
Thullier, J.
2012Contraintes préférentielles et ordre des mots en français. Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris-Diderot.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U., W. Labov & M. Herzog
1968Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, R.
1997Negation and clausal structure. A Comparative study of romance languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zeevat, H.
2001The asymmetry of optimality theoretic syntax and semantics. Journal of semantics 17. 243–262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Labelle, Marie
2017. Negative concord in Quebec French. Probus 0:0 Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 august 2021. 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.