Part of
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 15: Selected papers from 'Going Romance' 30, Frankfurt
Edited by Ingo Feldhausen, Martin Elsig, Imme Kuchenbrandt and Mareike Neuhaus
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 15] 2019
► pp. 93112
References (32)
References
Anand, Pranav. 2006. De De Se. Ph.D. Dissertation: MIT.Google Scholar
Anand, Pranav, and Valentine Hacquard. 2013. “Epistemics and Attitudes”. Semantics and Pragmatics 6 (8): 1–59.Google Scholar
Antomo, Mailin. 2009. “Interpreting Embedded Verb Second. Causal modifiers in German”. Proceedings of ConSOLE XVII: 27–51.Google Scholar
Charnavel, Isabelle. 2017. “Exempt Anaphors and Logophoricity in French”. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 12. Selected papers from the 45th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Campinas, Brazil, ed. by Ruth E. V. Lopes, Juanito Ornelas de Avelar, and Sonia M. L. Cyrino, 15–28. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2018. Perspectives in Causal Clauses. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory: 1–36.Google Scholar
. to appear. “French Causal puisque-clauses in the light of (not)-at-issueness.” In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory – Selected papers from the 47th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL47), Newark, Delaware. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Charnavel, Isabelle, and Dominique Sportiche. 2016. “Anaphor Binding – What French Inanimate Anaphors Show.” Linguistic Inquiry 47 (1): 35–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clements, George N.. 1975. “The Logophoric Pronoun in Ewe: Its Role in Discourse”. Journal of West African Languages 10: 141–177.Google Scholar
Culy, Christopher. 1994. “Aspects of Logophoric Marking”. Linguistics 32: 1055–1094. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley, and Robert Hamilton. 1998. “Epithets as Antilogophoric Pronouns”. Linguistic Inquiry 29 (4): 685–693. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1983. “Puisque: essai de description polyphonique”. Revue romane 24: 166–185.Google Scholar
Faller, Martina. 2002. Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quecha. Ph.D. Dissertation: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Groupe Lambda-1. 1975. “Car, parce que, puisque”. Revue Romane 10: 248–280.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2003. “Conditional Clauses: External and Internal Syntax”. Mind and Language 18 (4): 317–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, and Virginia Hill. 2013. “The Syntacticization of Discourse”. In Syntax and its Limits, ed. by Raffaella R. Folli, Christina Sevdali, and Robert Truswell, 370–390. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James, and C.-S. Luther Liu. 2001. “Logophoricity, Attitudes, and Ziji at the Interface”. Long-Distance Reflexives 33: 141–195.Google Scholar
Johnston, Michael James Robert. 1994. The Syntax and Semantics of Adverbial Adjuncts. Ph.D. Dissertation: University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda, and Dominique Sportiche. 1989. “Pronouns, Logical Variables and Logophoricity in Abe”. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 555–589.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2014. “Embedding Illocutionary Acts”. In Recursion: Complexity in Cognition, ed. by Tom Roeper, and Margaret Speas, 59–87. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K.. 1973. “Causation”. Journal of Philosophy 70: 556–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murray, Sarah E.. 2010. Evidentiality and the Structure of Speech acts. PhD Dissertation: Rutgers University-Graduate School-New Brunswick.Google Scholar
Oshima, David Y.. 2007. “Motion Deixis, Indexicality, and Presupposition”. In Proceedings of SALT 16: 172–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, William. 1970. “Some Observations concerning Subordinate Clauses in English”. Language 46: 97–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruwet, Nicolas. 1990. “En et y: deux clitiques pronominaux antilogophoriques”. Langages 97: 51–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sæbø, Kjell Johan. 1991. “Causal and Purposive Clauses”. In Semantik –Semantics. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung – An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, ed. by Armin von Stechow, and Dieter Wunderlich, 623–631. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sells, Peter. 1987. “Aspects of Logophoricity”. Linguistic Inquiry 18: 445–79.Google Scholar
Sheffler, Tatjana. 2008. Semantic operators in different dimensions. PhD Dissertation: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Speas, Margaret, and Carol L. Tenny. 2003. “Configurational Properties of Point of View Roles”. In Asymmetry in Grammar. Volume 1: Syntax and Semantics, ed. by Anna Maria Di Sciullo, 315–344. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speas, Margaret. 2004. “Evidentiality, Logophoricity and the Syntactic Representation of Pragmatic Features”. Lingua 114: 255–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, Tamina. 2007. “Judge Dependence, Epistemic Modals, and Predicates of Personal Taste”. Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 487–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1976. “Reflexives and Subjunctives in Icelandic”. Sixth Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistics Society: 225–239.Google Scholar