Article published in:
Linguistic Variation
Vol. 19:2 (2019) ► pp. 352385
References

References

Abraham, W.
1991Discourse particles in German: How does their illocutive force come about? In W. Abraham (ed.), Discourse Particles: Descriptive and Theoretical Investigations on the Logical, Syntactic and Pragmatic Properties of Discourse Particles in German, 203–252. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Discourse marker = discourse particle = thetical = modal particle? A futile comparison. In J. Bayer & V. Struckmeier (eds.), Discourse Particles: Formal Approaches to their Syntax and Semantics, 241–280. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Alberdi, X.
1994Euskararen tratamenduak: erabilera. UPV-EHU.Google Scholar
Albizu, P.
1991Sobre la existencia del Movimiento Largo de Núcleos en Euskera. Manuscript, Madrid: Instituto Universitario Ortega y Gasset.Google Scholar
Alcázar, A.
2017A syntactic analysis of rhetorical questions. In A. Kaplan, A. Kaplan, M. K. McCarvel & E. J. Rubin (eds.), Proceedings of the 34th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 32–41. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Antonov, A.
2015Verbal allocutivity in a crosslinguistic perspective. Linguistic Typology 19, 55–85. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arregi, K. & A. Nevins
2012Morphotactics: Basque Auxiliaries and the Structure of Spellout. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Artiagoitia, X. & A. Elordieta
2016On the semantic function and selection of Basque finite complementizers. In K. Boye & P. Kehayov (eds.), Complementizer Semantics in European Languages, 379–412. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Azkue, R. M.
1923Morfología vasca. Bilbao: Euskaltzaindia.Google Scholar
Bayer, J., J. Häussler & M. Bader
2016A new diagnostic for cyclic wh-movement: Discourse particles in German questions. Linguistic Inquiry 47, 591–629. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayer, J. & H.-G. Obenauer
2011Discourse particles, clause structure, and question types. The Linguistic Review 28, 449–491. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayer, J. & A. Trotzke
2015The derivation and interpretation of left peripheral discourse particles. In J. Bayer, R. Hinterhölzl & A. Trotzke (eds.), Discourse-oriented Syntax, 13–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A.
2011German and Italian modal particles and clause structure. The Linguistic Review 28, 493–531. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Italian verb-based discourse particles in a comparative perspective. In J. Bayer, R. Hinterhölzl & A. Trotzke (eds.), Discourse-oriented Syntax, 71–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. & M. Starke
1999The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In H. van Riemsdijk (ed.), Clitics in the Languages of Europe, 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, L. L.-S.
1997On the Typology of Wh-Questions. New York/London: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
1965Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1980Rules and Representations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2001Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G.
1999Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coniglio, M.
2011Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln: Ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coniglio, M. & I. Zegrean
2012Splitting up force: Evidence from discourse particles. In L. Aelbrecht, L. Haegeman & R. Nye (eds.), Main Clause Phenomena, 229–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craenenbroeck, J. van
2005Adverbial modification under sluicing. In K. Choi & C. Yim (eds.), Ellipsis in Minimalism: Proceedings of the Seventh Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar, 77–102. Seoul: Hankook.Google Scholar
Degen, J., A. Trotzke, G. Scontras, E. Wittenberg & N. D. Goodman
2019Definitely, maybe: A new experimental paradigm for investigating the pragmatics of evidential devices across languages. Journal of Pragmatics 140, 33–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Del Gobbo, F., N. Munaro & C. Poletto
2015On sentential particles: A cross-linguistic study. In S. Hancil, A. Haselow & M. Post (eds.), Final Particles, 359–386. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dörre, L. & A. Trotzke
2019The processing of secondary meaning: An experimental comparison of focus and modal particles in wh-questions. In D. Gutzmann & K. Turgay (eds.), Secondary Content: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Side Issues, 144–168. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Duhalde, M.
in press. Frontières politiques et isoglosses: caractéristiques phonologiques du parler basque du Labourd côtier. Scriptum.
Egg, M. & M. Zimmermann
2012“Stressed out!” Accented discourse particles. The case of doch. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16, 225–238.Google Scholar
Elordieta, A.
2001Verb Movement and Constituent Permutation in Basque. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Elordieta, A. & W. Haddican
2016Strategies of verb and verb phrase focus across Basque dialects. In B. Fernandez & J. Ortiz de Urbina (eds.), Microparameters in the Grammar of Basque, 221–242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Elordieta, G.
1997Morphosyntactic Feature Chains and Phonological Domains. PhD dissertation, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Emonds, J.
1970Root and Structure-Preserving Transformations. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Etxepare, R.
1998A case for two types of focus in Basque. In E. Benedicto, M. Romero & S. Tomioka (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Focus, 65–81. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar
Etxepare, R. & B. Fernandez
2013Variation in Datives: A Micro-comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Euskaltzaindia [The Royal Academy of the Basque Language]
1987Euskal gramatika: lehen urratsak II. Bilbao: Euskaltzaindia.Google Scholar
Fernandez, B. & M. Rezac
2013Dative displacement in Basque. In B. Fernandez & R. Etxepare (eds.), Variation in Datives: A Micro-comparative Perspective, 256–282. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2016Differential object marking in Basque varieties. In B. Fernandez & J. Ortiz de Urbina (eds.), Microparameters in the Grammar of Basque, 93–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garmendia, J.
2014Ote: hiztunaren ziurtasunik eza. Gogoa 12, 7–26.Google Scholar
Giannakidou, A. & A. Mari
2018The semantic roots of positive polarity: Epistemic modal verbs and adverbs in English, Greek and Italian. Linguistics and Philosophy 41, 623–664. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, P.
2014German “doch”: an element that triggers a contrast presupposition. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 46, 163–178.Google Scholar
2016aDiscourse particles. To appear in L. Matthewson, C. Meier, H. Rullmann & T. E. Zimmermann (eds.): The Companion to Semantics (SemCom). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
2016bInformation structure and discourse particles. In C. Fery & S. Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Information Structure, 336–358. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gutzmann, D.
2015Use-Conditional Meaning: Studies in Multidimensional Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Euskararen espez-buru-osagarri hurrenkeraren aldeko argudio batzuk. In I. Arteatx, X. Artiagoitia & A. Elordieta (eds.), Antisimetriaren Hipotesia vs Buru-parametroa: euskararen oinarrizko hurrenkera ezbaian, 87–124. Bilbao: UPV-EHU.Google Scholar
Haegeman, L.
2002Anchoring to speaker, adverbial clauses, and the structure of CP. Georgetown University Working Papers in Linguistics 17, 109–141.Google Scholar
2014West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer. Studia Linguistica 68, 116–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hill, V.
2002Complementizer Phrases (CP) in Romanian. Rivista di Linguistica 14, 223–248.Google Scholar
Hooper, J. & S. Thompson
1973On the applicability of Root Transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4, 465–97.Google Scholar
Hornstein, N. & J. Nunes
2014Minimalism and control. A. Carnie, Y. Sato & D. Siddiqi (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Syntax, 239–263. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. & J. Ortiz de Urbina
2003A Grammar of Basque. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, A.
1999Beyond Ouch and Oops. How descriptive and expressive meanings interact. Paper presented at the Cornell Conference on Context Dependency, Cornell University.
Kuong, I.-K. J.
2008Yes/no question particles revisited: The grammatical functions of mo4, me1, and maa3. Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-20), 715–733.Google Scholar
Kuwabara, K.
2013Peripheral effects in Japanese questions and the fine structure of CP. Lingua 126, 92–119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lafitte, P.
1944Grammaire Basque (Navarro Labourdin littéraire). Bayonne: Le Livre.Google Scholar
Laka, I.
1990Negation in Syntax: On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
1991Sentence negation in Basque. Anuario Del Seminario De Filología Vasca/Julio de Urquijo, 899–926.Google Scholar
Li, B.
2006Chinese Final Particles and the Syntax of the Periphery. Utrecht: LOT Dissertations.Google Scholar
Lohnstein, H.
2007On clause types and sentential force. Linguistische Berichte 209, 63–86.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, S.
2012Agreements that occur mainly in the main clause. In L. Aelbrecht, L. Haegeman & R. Nye (eds.), Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, 79–111. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Monforte, S.
2018Question particles in Basque. Isogloss. A Journal on Variation of Romance and Iberian Languages 4, 29–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Munaro, N. & C. Poletto
2002Ways of clausal typing. Rivista di grammatica generativa 27, 87–105.Google Scholar
2008Sentential particles and clausal typing in Venetan dialects. In B. Shaer, P. Cook, W. Frey & C. Maienborn (eds.), Dislocated Elements in Discourse: Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Perspectives, 173–199. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Murray, S.
2017The Semantics of Evidentials. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nasu, N.
2012Topic particle stranding and the structure of CP. In L. Aelbrecht, L. Haegeman & R. Nye (eds.), Main Clause Phenomena, 205–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nikolaeva, I.
2016Analyses of the semantics of mood. In J. Nuyts & J. van der Auwera (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modality and Mood, 68–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nunes, J.
2012Sideward movement: Triggers, timing, and outputs. In M. Uribe-Etxebarria & V. Valmala (eds.), Ways of Structure Building, 114–142. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Obenauer, H.-G.
2006Special interrogatives: Left periphery, wh-doubling, and (apparently) optional elements. In J. Doetjes & P. González (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004, 247–273. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ortiz de, Urbina J.
1987Operator movement and verb second phenomena in Basque. ASJU 21, 321–355.Google Scholar
1989Dislocaciones verbales en estructuras de polaridad. ASJU 23, 393–410.Google Scholar
Ortiz de Urbina, J.
1992Inversión y movimiento verbal en euskara. Revista Española De Lingüística 22, 107–32.Google Scholar
Ortiz de, Urbina J.
1993Checking domains in Basque and Breton. ASJU 27, 751–775.Google Scholar
1994Verb-initial patterns in Basque and Breton. Lingua 94, 125–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999Force phrases, focus phrases and left heads in Basque. In J. Franco & A. Landa (eds.), Grammatical Analyses in Basque and Romance Linguistics, 179–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Oyharçabal, B.
1993Verb agreement with nonarguments: On allocutive agreement. In J. I. Hualde & J. Ortiz de Urbina (eds.) Generative Studies in Basque Linguistics, 89–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paul, W. & V. J. Pan
2017What you see is what you get: Chinese sentence-final particles as head-final complementizers. In J. Bayer & V. Struckmeier (eds.), Discourse Particles: Formal Approaches to their Syntax and Semantics, 49–77. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. & E. Torrego
2007The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In S. Karimi, V. Samiian & W. K. Wilkins (eds.), Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic Derivation and Interpretation, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poletto, C. & R. Zanuttini
2010Sentential particles and remnant movement. In P. Benincà & N. Munaro (eds.) Mapping the Left Periphery, 201–227. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Potts, C.
2007The expressive dimension. Theoretical Linguistics 33, 165–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Rijk, R.
1969Is Basque an S.O.V. language? FLV 3, 319–351.Google Scholar
2008Standard Basque: A Progressive Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L.
1997The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook in Generative Syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014Syntactic cartography and the syntacticisation of scope-discourse semantics. In A. Reboul (ed.), Mind, Values, and Metaphysics, 517–533. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
2017Locality and the functional sequence in the left periphery. In E. O. Aboh, E. Haeberli, G. Puskás, M. Schönenberger (eds.), Elements of Comparative Syntax: Theory and Description, 319–348. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rojas-Esponda, T.
2014A discourse model for überhaupt. Semantics & Pragmatics 7, 1–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sauerland, U. & K. Yatsushiro
2017Remind-me presuppositions and speech-act decomposition: Evidence from particles in questions. Linguistic Inquiry 48, 651–677. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thurmair, M.
1989Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trotzke, A.
2017The Grammar of Emphasis: From Information Structure to the Expressive Dimension. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trotzke, A. & G. Turco
2015The grammatical reflexes of emphasis: Evidence from German wh-questions. Lingua 168, 37–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trotzke, A. & J.-W. Zwart
2014The complexity of narrow syntax: Minimalism, representational economy, and simplest Merge. In F. J. Newmeyer & L. B. Preston (eds.), Measuring Grammatical Complexity, 128–147. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, H.
2006On the semantic motivation of syntactic verb movement to C in German. Theoretical Linguistics 32, 257–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Villasante, L.
1980Sintaxis de la oración simple. Oñati: Editorial Franciscana.Google Scholar
Waltereit, R.
2001Modal particles and their functional equivalents: A speech-act-theoretic approach. Journal of Pragmatics 33, 1391–1417. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, M.
2008Discourse particles in the left periphery. In B. Shaer et al. (eds.), Dislocated Elements in Discourse: Syntactic, Semantic, and Pragmatic Perspectives, 200–231. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2011Discourse particles. In P. Portner, C. Maienborn & K. von Heusinger (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, 2011–2038. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zuazo, K.
2014Euskalkiak. Donostia: Elkar.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Beltrama, Andrea & Andreas Trotzke
2019. Conveying emphasis for intensity: Lexical and syntactic strategies. Language and Linguistics Compass 13:7  pp. e12343 ff. Crossref logo
Monforte, Sergio
2020.  In Information-Structural Perspectives on Discourse Particles [Studies in Language Companion Series, 213],  pp. 278 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 04 october 2020. 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.