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
Abeillé, A. & D. Godard
1996La complémentation des auxiliaires en français. Langages 1221. 32–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997The syntax of French negative adverbs. In D. Forget (ed.), Negation and polarity: syntax and semantics, 1–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002The syntactic structure of French auxiliaries. Language 781. 404–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adger, D
2014Variability and grammatical architecture. In C. Picallo (ed.), Linguistic variation in the minimalist framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adger, D. & J. Smith
2010Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach. Lingua 1201. 1109–1134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barwise, J. & R. Cooper
1981Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 41. 159–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blutner, R
2000Some aspects of optimality in natural language semantics. Journal of Semantics 171. 189–216. DOI logoGoogle 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 321. 45–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P. & D. Weenik
2014Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.3.80, retrieved 29 June 2014. from [URL].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 111. 297–306. DOI logoGoogle 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 211. 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. DOI logoGoogle 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 121. 107–127.Google Scholar
de Swart, H
2010Expression and interpretation of negation: An OT Typology. Springer, Dordrecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Swart, H. & I. Sag
2002Negation and negative concord in Romance. Linguistics & Philosophy 251. 373–415. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Déprez, V
2002Concordance négative, syntaxe des mots-N et variation dialectale. Cahiers de linguistique française 251. 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 71. 21–37.Google Scholar
Eckert, P
2008Variation and the indexical field. Journal of sociolinguistics 121. 453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A
2006N-words and negative concord. In M. Everaert (ed.), Blackwell companion to syntax (Volume 31), 327–391. Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logo
Grimshaw, J
1997Projection, heads and optimality. Linguistic inquiry 281. 373–422.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J
2004Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, P. & de H. Hoop
2001Optimality theoretic semantics. Linguistics and philosophy 241. 1–32. DOI logoGoogle 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 111. 427–451. DOI logoGoogle 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 491. 167–185. DOI logoGoogle 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 81. 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 91. 253–326. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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 191. 273–309. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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 271. 661–738. DOI logoGoogle 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 281. 771–786. DOI logoGoogle 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 201. 365–424.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. & N. Dion
2009Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language 851. 557–587. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. & D. Turpin
1999Does the futur have a future in (canadian) french? Probus 111. 133–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, A. & P. Smolensky
1993Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University center for cognitive science technical report, 21.Google Scholar
Rosenbach, A
2002Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language 811. 613–644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, G. & D. Vincent
1977L’emploi productif de ne dans le français parlé à montréal. Le Français moderne 451. 243–256.Google Scholar
Sciullo, A.-M.D. & M. Tremblay
1996Configurations et interprétations: les morphèmes de la négation. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 251. 27–52.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. & F. Keller
2005Gradience in linguistic data. Lingua 1151. 1497–1524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stabler, E
2013Two models of minimalist, incremental syntactic analysis. Trends in cognitive science 51. 611–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S
2011Variation as a window on universals. In P. Siemund (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle 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 171. 243–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

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

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 april 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.