Chapter published in:
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 11: Selected papers from the 44th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), London, Ontario
Edited by Silvia Perpiñán, David Heap, Itziri Moreno-Villamar and Adriana Soto-Corominas
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 11] 2017
► pp. 147167
References
ALF Gilliéron, Jules & Edmond Edmont. Atlas Linguistique de la France, Paris, Champion, 1902–1910.
ALAL Potte, Jean-Claude. Atlas Linguistique et ethnographique de l’Auvergne et du Limousin, Paris, CNRS, 1975–1992.
ALLOc Ravier, Xavier. Atlas Linguistique et ethnographique du Languedoc Occidental, Paris, CNRS, 1978–1994.
ALG Séguy, Jean. Atlas Linguistique et ethnographique de la Garonne, Paris, CNRS, 1954–1973.
THESOC=Dalbera, Jean-Philippe, Dominique Strazzabosco, Michèle Oliviéri, Pierre-Aurélien Georges & Guylaine Brun-Trigaud, Thesaurus Occitan, http://​thesaurus​.unice​.fr> 1992.
Béjar, Susana
2003Phi-Syntax: A Theory of Agreement. PhD. thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Bruhn de Garavito, Joyce, Jacques Lamarche & David Heap
2002 “French and Spanish Se: Underspecified, not Reflexive.” 2002 Proceedings of the Canadian Linguistic Association.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi
1992 “On the morphology of reflexives and impersonals.” In Theoretical analyses in Romance linguistics. Current issues in linguistic theory 74, ed by Christiane Laeufer & Terrell A. Morgan, 399–414. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cabredo Hofherr, Patrizia
2000La passivation des intransitifs en allemand et le statut des explétifs. Paris: Université Paris VII – Denis Diderot, U.F.R. de linguistique.Google Scholar
2004 “Les clitiques sujets du français et le paramètre du sujet nul.” Langue Française 141: 99–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1981Lectures on Government and Binding. The Pisa Lectures. Second revised edition 1982. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Dalbera, Jean-Philippe
2006Des dialectes au langage: Une archéologie du sens. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Dalbera, Jean-Philippe, Michèle Oliviéri, Jean-Claude Ranucci, Guylaine Brun-Trigaud & Pierre-Aurélien Georges
2012 “La base de données linguistique occitane THESOC. Trésor patrimonial et instrument de recherche scientifique.” Estudis Romànics 34: 367–387.Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, Gunther & Guido Seiler
(eds.) 2012The Dialect Laboratory. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diémoz, Federica
2007Morphologie et syntaxe des pronoms personnels sujets dans les parlers francoprovençaux de la Vallée d’Aoste. Tübingen: A. Francke Verlag.Google Scholar
Gilliéron, Jules & Jean Mongin
1905“Scier” dans la Gaule romane du Sud et de l’Est, Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Elizabeth Ritter
2002 “Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis.” Language 78: 482–526. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heap, David
2000La variation grammaticale en géolinguistique: les pronoms sujets en roman central. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2002 “Split subject pronoun paradigms : Feature geometry and underspecification.” In Current Issues in Romance Languages : Selected Papers from the 29th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Ann Arbor, 8–11 April 1999, ed. by Teresa Satterfield, Christina M. Tortora, and Diana Cresti, 129–144. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heap, David & Michèle Oliviéri
2013 “On the emergence of nominative clitics in Romance dialects.” Paper at the Workshop European Dialect Syntax VII, University of Constance, 13–15 juin 2013.
Kaiser, Georg A., Michèle Oliviéri & Katerina Palasis
2013 “Impersonal constructions in northern Occitan.” In Current Approaches to Limits and Areas in Dialectology, ed by Xosé Afonso Álvarez Perez, Ernestina Carrilho & Catarina Magro, 345–366. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press/CSP.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Leonardo M. Savoia
2005I dialetti italiani e romanci: morfosintassi generativa. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar
Mettouchi, Amina & Mauro Tosco
2011 “Impersonal configurations and theticity: the case of meteorological predications in Afroasiatic. ” In Impersonal Constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective, ed. by Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska, 307–322. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam
1997‘Be I no GAT’: constraints on null subjects in Bislama. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Thesis.Google Scholar
Oliviéri, Michèle
2010 “From Dialectology to Diachrony: Evidence from Lexical and Morpho-Syntactic Reconstruction in Romance Dialects.” Proceedings of Methods XIII. Papers from The Thirteenth International Conference on Methods in Dialectology, 2008, ed. by Barry Heselwood and Clive Upton, 42–52. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2011 “Typology or Reconstruction: the Benefits of Dialectology for Diachronic Analysis.” In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2009. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Nice 2009, ed. by Janine Berns, Haike Jacobs, and Tobias Scheer, 239–253. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oliviéri, Michèle, Georg A. Kaiser, Michael Zimmermann, Katerina Palasis, and Richard Faure
. à paraître 2015 “Quand la dialectologie, la diachronie et l'acquisition se parlent : Étude comparative des pronoms sujets en occitan et en français.” In SyMiLa 2015: La microvariation syntaxique dans les langues romanes de France, ed. by Patrick Sauzet, and Jean Sibille. Limoges: Lambert Lucas.Google Scholar
Palasis, Katerina
2010Syntaxe générative et acquisition: le sujet dans le développement du système linguistique du jeune enfant. Villeneuve d’Ascq: ANRT Diffusion.Google Scholar
Renzi, Lorenzo & Laura Vanelli
1983 “I pronomi soggetto in alcune varietà romanze.” In Scritti linguistici in onore di G.B. Pellegrini, 42–56. Pisa: Pacini.Google Scholar
Ronjat, Jules
1937Grammaire Istorique des Parlers Provençaux Modernes. Genève-Marseille: Slatkine / Laffitte Reprints.Google Scholar
Tosco, Mauro
2005 “La naissance d’une catégorie morphologique: les clitiques sujet entre couchitique et langues romanes.” Faits de langues 26: 203–215.Google Scholar
2007 “Feature-geometry and diachrony.” Diachronica 24 1: 119–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar