Review published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 30:1 (2006) ► pp. 206221
References
Asher, N. & Lascarides, A.
(1998): ‘The semantics and pragmatics of presuppositionJournal of Semantics, 15(3), 215–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J., Perkins, R. D. & Pagliuca, W.
(1994): The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago press.Google Scholar
Chierchia, G.
(1998): ‘Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of “semantic parameter”’. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Events and grammar (pp 53–103). Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Swart, H.
(1998): ‘Aspect shift and coercion’. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 161. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Elsness, J.
(1997): The perfect and the preterite in contemporary and earlier English. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, D.
(1992): ‘On the semantics of subjunctive complements’. In P. Hirschbühler & K. Korner (eds.), Romance languages and modern linguistic theory (pp 71–104). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P. J. & Thompson, S. A.
(1980): ‘Transitivity in grammar and discourse’. Language, 561, 251–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kamp, H. & Reyle, U.
(1993): From discourse to logic. Introduction to modeltheoretic semantics, formal logic and discourse representation theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
Karttunen, L.
(1971): The logic of English predicate complement constructions. Indiana University Linguistic Club.Google Scholar
Kempson, R. M., Meyer-Viol, W. & Gabbay, D.
(2001): Dynamic syntax: The flow of natural language understanding. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Móia, T.
(2000): Identifying and computing temporal locating adverbials with a particular focus on Portuguese and English. PhD diss., Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
Laka, I.
(1990): Negation in syntax: On the nature of functional categories and projections. PhD dissertation, MIT. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. & Rosen, S. T.
(1998): ‘Delimiting events in syntax’. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments (pp 135–164). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D.
(1989): La pertinence, communication et cognition. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar