Chapter published in:
Usage-Based Studies in Modern Hebrew: Background, Morpho-lexicon, and Syntax
Edited by Ruth A. Berman
[Studies in Language Companion Series 210] 2020
► pp. 539582
References

References

Benveniste, Émile
1966Structure des relations de personne dans le verbe. In Problèmes de linguistique générale, Vol. 1, 225–236. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Berman, Ruth A.
1979Form and function: Impersonals, passives, and middles in Modern Hebrew. Berkeley Linguistic Society 5: 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1980The case of an (S)VO language: Subjectless constructions in Modern Hebrew. Language 56(4): 759–776. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1981Dative marking of the affectee role. Hebrew Annual Review 6: 35–59.Google Scholar
2005Introduction: Developing discourse stance in different text types and languages. Journal of Pragmatics 37(2): 105–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Revisiting impersonal constructions in Modern Hebrew: Discourse-based perspectives. In Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 124], Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds), 323–355. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berman, Ruth A. & Neeman, Yonni
1994Development of linguistic forms: Hebrew. In Relating Events in Narrative: A Crosslinguistic Developmental Study, Ruth A. Berman & Dan I. Slobin (eds), 285–328. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Blau, Joshua
1996ʕal hasavil hastami bamiqraʔ (On the impersonal passive in Biblical Hebrew). In Studies in Hebrew Linguistics, 114–121. Jerusalem: Magnes.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard
1933Language. New York NY: Henry Holt & Company.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1973 Ambient it is meaningful too. Journal of Linguistics 9(2): 261–270. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1979To catch a metaphor: You as norm. American Speech 54(3): 194–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit
1989Anaphoric AGR. In The Null Subject Parameter [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15], Osvalso Jaeggli & Kenneth J. Safir (eds), 69–109. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borschev, Vladimir & Partee, Barbara H.
2002The Russian genitive of negation: Theme-rheme structure or perspective structure? Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10(1–2): 105–144.Google Scholar
Bossong, Georg
1998Le marquage de l’expérient dans les langues d’Europe. In Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 20–2], Jack Feuillet (ed.), 259–294. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
2006Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bybee Joan L. & Hopper, Paul
2001Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure [Typological Studies in Language 45]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia
2003Arbitrary readings of 3pl pronominal. In Proceedings of the Conference ‘sub7 – Sinn und Bedeutung’ [Arbeitspapier 114], Matthias Weisgerber (ed.), 81–94. Konstanz: FB Sprachwissenshaft, Universität Konstanz. < http://​ling​.uni​-konstanz​.de​/pages​/conferences​/sub7/>Google Scholar
Cinque, Gugliemo
1988On Si constructions and the theory of Arb . Linguistic Inquiry 19(4): 521–581.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis
2006Syntaxe générale: Une introduction typologique. Paris: Hermes Science–Lavoisier.Google Scholar
2008Impersonal and related constructions: A typological approach. Lectures presented at the University of Tartu, 2–3 June.
Croft, William A.
2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Typology and Universals. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Croft, William A. & Cruse, D. Alan
2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doron, Edit
2003Bare singular reference to kinds. In Proceedings of Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics 19, Yehuda F. Falk (ed.). Jerusalem: Hebrew University. < http://​linguistics​.huji​.ac​.il​/IATL​/19/ > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David
Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619. Crossref
Dubnov, Keren
2013Russian and Slavic influence on Modern Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Vol. 3, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 576–578. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Gast, Volker & Florian Haas
2011On the distribution of subject properties in formulaic presentationals of Germanic and Romance: A diachronic-typological approach. In Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 124], Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds), 127–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gast, Volker & van der Auwera, Johan
2013Towards a distributional typology of human impersonal pronouns. In Languages across Boundaries: Studies in Memory of Anna Siewierska, Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds), 119–158. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1976aTopic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed.), 151–188. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1976bOn the VS order in Israeli Hebrew: Pragmatics and typological change. In Studies in Modern Hebrew Syntax and Semantics: The Transformational-Generative Approach [North Holland Linguistic Series 32], Peter Cole (ed.), 153–181. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
1995Constructions: A construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2003Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science 7(5): 219–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Goldenberg, Gideon
1998On verbal structure and the Hebrew verb. In Studies in Semitic Linguistics: Selected Writings , 148–197. Jerusalem: Magnes.Google Scholar
2013Semitic Languages: Features, Structures, Relations, Processes. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Grossman, Eitan
2013‘So you just flow with it’: A discourse strategy in ‘soldiers’ testimonies’ from the occupied Palestinian territories. In Meditations on Authority, David Dean Shulman (ed), 157–191. Jerusalem: Magnes.Google Scholar
Hale, Ken
1982Preliminary remarks on configurationality. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistic Society 12: 86–96.Google Scholar
Halevy, Rivka
1992tʔarim ħofšiyim utʔarim bilti ħofšiyim baʕivrit haħadašah (Free and restricted adjectives in Contemporary Hebrew). In Language Studies, Vol. 5–6, Moshe Bar-Asher (ed.), 521–537. Jerusalem: Magnes.Google Scholar
2006tifqudah šel ‘zeh’ habilti leqsiqalit bʕivrit bat yameynu (The function of nonlexical ‘ze’ in Contemporary Hebrew). Lešonenu 67: 283–307.Google Scholar
2013aDeixis: Modern Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Vol. 1, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 693–697. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
2013bSyntax: Modern Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Vol. 3, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 707–722. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
2016Non-canonical ‘existential-like’ constructions in colloquial Modern Hebrew. In Atypical Predicate-Argument Relations [Lingvisticæ Investigationes Supplementa 33], Thierry Ruchot & Pascale Van Praet (eds), 27–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Izre’el, Shlomo
2018Unipartite clauses: A view from spoken Israeli Hebrew. In Afroasiatic Data and Perspectives [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 339], Mauro Tosco (ed.), 235–260. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto & Haislund, Niels
2013Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Vol. 7: Syntax . London: Routledge. (Original work published 1954) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1937Analytic Syntax. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.Google Scholar
1965The Philosophy of Grammar. New York NY: Norton & Company. (Original work published 1924)Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L.
1976Towards a formal definition of ‘Subject’. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed.), 305–333. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2003The definiteness effect: Semantics or pragmatics? Natural Language Semantics 11(2): 187–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, Chisato & Lehrer, Adrienne
1990Impersonal uses of personal pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 14(5): 739–759. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuzar, Ron
1993ha‘ħagam’ – ħeleq dibur ʔo ʕemdah taħbirit? (The impersonal constructions – a part of speech or a syntactic position?). Lešonenu 56(3): 241–248.Google Scholar
2000‘ʔašrey hamaʔamin’ wtavniyot domot bʕivrit ʕal rvadeha ( ‘Blessed is the believer’ and similar constructions in the different phases of Hebrew). Hebrew Linguistics 46: 55–67.Google Scholar
2002tavnit ha‘ħagam’ hapšutah balašon hamyuceget kimduberet([The simple impersonal construction in texts represented as colloquial Hebrew). In Speaking Hebrew: Studies in the Spoken Language and in Linguistic Variation in Israel [Te’uda 18], Shlomo Izre’el (ed.), 329–352. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
2012Sentence Patterns in English and Hebrew [Constructional Approaches to Language 12]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, Pierre-Yves
1998L’impersonnel. In Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 20–2], Jack Feillet (ed.), 295–345. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
2000When subjects behave like objects: An analysis of the merging of S and O in sentence focus constructions across languages. Studies in Language 24(3): 611–682. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Robert W.
1991Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 2. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lauwers, Peter & Willems, Dominique
2011Coercion: Definitions and challenges, current approaches, and new trends. Linguistics 49(6): 1219–1235. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel
2008Definiteness effect and the role of the coda in existential constructions. In Essays on Nominal Determination: From Morphology to Discourse Management [Studies in Language Companion Series 99], Henrik Høeg Müller & Alex Klinge (eds), 131–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John
1977Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
1995Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej & Siewierska, Anna
2011 Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 124]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej & Ogawa, Akio
2011Towards a typology of impersonal constructions: A semantic map approach. In Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 124], Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds), 19–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNally, Louise
2011Existential sentences. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 2 [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 33–2], Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul Portner (eds), 1829–1848. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Milsark, Gary
1974Existential sentences in English. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Muchnik, Malka
2015The Gender Challenge of Hebrew [The Brill Reference Library of Judaism 42]. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Oz, Amos
2002sipur ʕal ʔahavah wħošex (A Tale of Love and Darkness). Jerusalem: Keter.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David M.
1983Personal vs. impersonal constructions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 1(1): 141–200. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rabin, Haiim B.
1998givun signoni baguf hastami bamikraʔ (Stylistic variation in use of impersonals in Biblical Hebrew). In Linguistic Studies: Collected Papers in Hebrew and Semitic Languages, Moshe Bar-Asher & Baraq Dan (eds), 244–253. Jerusalem: The Academy of Hebrew Language & The Bialik Institute. (Original work published 1979)Google Scholar
Rosén, Haiim B.
1967 ʕivrit tovah (Good Hebrew). Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer.Google Scholar
1977Contemporary Hebrew [Trends in Linguistics: State-of-the-Art Reports 11]. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sa’ar, Amalia
2007Masculine talk: On the subconscious use of masculine linguistic forms among Hebrew- and Arabic-speaking women in Israel. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 32(2): 405–429. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1987The thetic/categorical distinction revisited. Linguistics 25(3): 511–580. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Theticity. In Pragmatic Organization of Discourse in the Languages of Europe [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 20–8], Giuliano Bernini & Marcia Linda Schwartz (eds), 255–308. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shimoni, Youval
1999 ħeder (A Room). Tel Aviv: Am-Oved.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur
2009Hebrew as a partial null-subject language. Studia Linguistica 63(1): 133–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna
1984The Passive: A Comparative Linguistic Analysis. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
2004Person. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Introduction: Impersonalization from a subject-centered vs. agent-centered perspective. Transactions of the Philological Society 106(2): 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna & Papastathi, Maria
2011Third person plurals in the languages of Europe: Typological and methodological issues. Linguistics 43(2): 575–610.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
1986Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon
2009Predicative Possession. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Taube, Dana
2007Impersonal and passive constructions in contemporary Hebrew. In Studies in Semitic and General Linguistics in Honor of Gideon Goldenberg, Tali Bar & Eran Cohen (eds), 277–297. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Van Valin Jr., Robert D.
2005Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Ziv, Yael
1976On the reanalysis of grammatical terms in Hebrew possessive constructions. In Studies in Modern Hebrew Syntax and Semantics [North-Holland Linguistic Series 32], Peter Cole (ed.), 153–181. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar