Chapter published in:
The Perfect Volume: Papers on the perfect
Edited by Kristin Melum Eide and Marc Fryd
[Studies in Language Companion Series 217] 2021
► pp. 138161
References

Sources

AAM – Araneum Anglicum Maius
ABM – Araneum Bulgaricum Maius
AHM – Araneum Hispanicum Maius
AIM – Araneum Italicum Maius
BNC – British National Corpus
LKT – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas (Corpus of Modern Lithuanian)

References

Adomavičiūtė, Irena & Čekmonas, Valerijus
1991Paradigma kvaziperfektnyx form na -(f)šy v “polščizne vilenskoj” (The paradigm of quasi-perfect forms in -(f)šy in “polszczyzna wileńska”). In Studia nad polszczyzną kresową. T. 6. (Studies in Polish Peripheral Dialects, Vol. 6), Janusz Rieger & Vjačeslav Verenič (eds), 95–105. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
Alpatov, Vladimir M., Arkad’ev, Petr M. & Podlesskaja, Vera I.
2008Teoretičeskaja grammatika japonskogo jazyka, T. 1. (Theoretical Grammar of Japanese, Vol. 1). Moscow: Natalis.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter
2010Notes on the Lithuanian restrictive. Baltic Linguistics 1: 9–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011On the aspectual uses of the prefix be- in Lithuanian. Baltic Linguistics 2: 37–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Negative events: Evidence from Lithuanian. In Donum semanticum: Opera linguistica et logica in honorem Barbarae Partee a discipulis amicisque Rossicis oblata, Peter Arkadiev, Ivan Kapitonov, Yury Lander, Ekaterina Rakhilina & Sergei Tatevosov (eds), 7–20. Moscow: LRC Publishing.Google Scholar
2016Long-distance genitive of negation in Lithuanian. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic 3], Axel Holvoet & Nicole Nau (eds), 37–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter & Daugavet, Anna
2016The perfect in Lithuanian and Latvian: A contrastive and comparative study. Talk at Chronos 12, Caen 15–17 June.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter & Wiemer, Björn
2020Perfects in Baltic and Slavic. In Perfects in Indo-European languages and Beyond [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 352], Robert Crellin & Thomas Jügel (eds), 123–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Binnick, Robert I.
(ed.) 2012The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bohnemeyer, Jürgen, Enfield, Nicholas J., Essegbey, James, Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide, Kita, Sotaro, Lüpke, Friederike & Ameka, Felix K.
2007Principles of event segmentation in language: The case of motion events. Language 83(3): 495–532. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borsley, Robert D. & Jones, Bob M.
2005Welsh Negation and Grammatical Theory. Cardiff: University of Wells Press.Google Scholar
Carrasco, Ángeles
2015Perfect states. Borealis 4(1): 1–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat
2006The Grammar of the English Verb Phrase, Vol. 1: The Grammar of the English Tense System. A Comprehensive Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse
1998On the resultative character of present perfect sentences. Journal of Pragmatics 29(5): 597–613. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George
1987A Grammar of Limbu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993A Grammar of Dumi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio & González Rodríguez, Raquel
2020On inhibited eventualities. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 38: 729–773. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
To appear. Negation with participles and inhibited events. To appear in Linguistic Analysis.
Fedotov, Maksim, Sofia Oskolskaya & Natalia Zaika
2020Caritive as a negative marker. Presentation at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea (online, 26 August – 1 September).
Filppula, Markku
1999The Grammar of Irish English. Language in Hibernian Style. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gehrke, Berit
2012Passive states. In Telicity, Change, and State. A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure, Violeta Demonte & Louise McNally (eds), 185–211. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geniušienė, Emma
1989O vzaimodejstvii perfekta i vida v litovskom jazyke (On the interactions of perfect and aspect in Lithuanian). Baltistica 3(2): 285–291.Google Scholar
1990Perfekt i vid v litovskom jazyke (Perfect and aspect in Lithuanian). In Tipologija i grammatika (Typology and Grammar), Viktor S. Xrakovskij (ed.), 135–140. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Geniušienė, Emma & Nedjalkov, Vladimir
1988Resultative, passive, and perfect in Lithuanian. In Typology of Resultative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 12], Vladimir Nedjalkov (ed.), 369–386. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
González Rodríguez, Raquel
2015Negation of resultative and progressive periphrases. Borealis 4(1): 31–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, John
1984Syntactic variation and dialect divergence. Journal of Linguistics 20(2): 303–327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, James
2000On events in linguistic semantics. In Speaking of Events, James Higginbotham, Fabio Pianesi & Achille C. Varzi (eds), 49–80. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Horn, Lawrence
1989A Natural History of Negation. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine, Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Izvorski, Roumyana
2001Observations about the form and meaning of the perfect. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 189–238. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Janssen, Theo M. V.
1983Scope ambiguities of tense, aspect and negation. In Linguistic Categories: Auxiliaries and Related Puzzles, Frank Heny & Barry Richards (eds), 55–99. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Katz, Graham
2003On the stativity of the English perfect. In Perfect Explorations [Interface Explorations 2], Artemis Alexiadou, Monika Rathert & Arnim von Stechow (eds), 205–234. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Khalilova, Zaira
2009A Grammar of Khwarshi. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Alexander E.
(ed.) 1996Godoberi. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Aleksandr E.
(ed.) 2001Bagvalinskij jazyk. Grammatika. Teksty. Slovarʹ (Bagwalal. Grammar, texts, dictionary). Moscow: Nasledie.Google Scholar
Kibrik, E. & Testelec, Jakov G.
(eds) 1999Èlementy caxurskogo jazyka v tipologičeskom osveščenii (Elements of Tsakhur in a typological perspective). Moscow: Nasledie.Google Scholar
Kishimoto, Hideki
2008On the variability of negative scope in Japanese. Journal of Linguistics 44(2): 379–435. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Verbal complex formation and negation in Japanese. Lingua 135: 132–154. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuz’mina, Irina B. & Nemčenko, Elena V.
1971Sintaksis pričastnyx form v russkix govorax (The syntax of participles in Russian dialects). Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Larsson, Ida
2009Participles in Time. The Development of the Perfect Tenses in Swedish. (Nordistica Gothoburgensia 29) Göteborg: Göteborgs Universitet.Google Scholar
Lundquist, Björn
2014Prefixed negation. Nordic Atlas of Language Structures Journal 1: 149–153.Google Scholar
Mackevič, Juzefa F. & Grinaveckienė, Elena
1993Dzejeprysloŭi na -(ŭ)šy ŭ belaruskix narodnyx gavorkax (Gerunds in -(ŭ)šy in Belorussian dialects). Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 30: 105–108.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D.
1999Some interactions between tense and negation in English. In The Clause in English: In Honour of Rodney D. Huddleston [Studies in Language Companion Series 45], Peter C. Collins & David A. Lee (eds), 177–185. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti & Koponen, Eino
2015Negation in Skolt Saami. In Miestamo, Tamm & Wagner-Nagy (eds), 353–375. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Tamm, Anne & Wagner-Nagy, Beáta
(eds) 2015Negation in Uralic Languages [Typological Studies in Language 108]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti & van der Auwera, Johan
2011Negation and perfective vs. imperfective aspect. Chronos 22: 65–84.Google Scholar
Nishiyama, Atsuko & Koenig, Jean-Pierre
2010What is a perfect state? Language 86(3): 611–646. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, Terrence
1990Events in the Semantics of English. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas
2009Hiberno-English medial-object perfects reconsidered. A case of contact-induced grammaticalisation. Studies in Language 33(3): 528–268. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010What has changed in Hiberno-English: constructions and their role in contact-induced change. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 63(2): 118–145.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
2004Two types of negation in Bengali. In Clause Structure in South Asian Languages, Veneeta Dayal & Anoop Mahajan (eds), 39–66. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian & Svenonius, Peter
2014Deriving the functional hierarchy. Language Sciences 46(B): 152–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Servaitė, Laimutė
1988Subjektinis rezultatyvas lietuvių kalboje (Perfekto formos su rezultatinės būsenos reikšme) (Subjective resultative in Lithuanian [Perfect forms denoting resulting state]). Kalbotyra 39(1): 81–89.Google Scholar
Sližienė, Nijolė
1964Apie sudurtines atliktines veiksmažodžio laikų ir nuosakų formas lietuvių literatūrinėje kalboje (On the compound perfect tenses and moods of verbs in Lithuanian standard language). Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 7: 81–95.Google Scholar
1967Lietuvių literatūrinės kalbos sudurtinių veiksmažodžio formų struktūra (The structure of compound verbal forms in Lithuanian standard language). Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 9: 63–84.Google Scholar
1969Sudurtinių atliktinių veiksmažodžio laikų reikšmės ir vartojimas (Meaning and use of the compound perfect tenses). Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 11: 17–40.Google Scholar
1995The tense system of Lithuanian. In The Tense Systems in European Languages, Vol. II, Rolf Thieroff (ed.), 215–232. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Slomanson, Peter
2009Morphosyntactic finiteness as increased complexity in a mixed negation system. In Complex Processes in New Languages [Typological Studies in Language 108], Enoch O. Aboh & Norval Smith (eds), 234–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, Robert P., Schachter, Paul & Partee, Barbara H.
1973The Major Syntactic Structures of English. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
de Swart, Henriёtte
2012Verbal aspect. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, Robert I. Binnick (ed.), 752–780. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
de Swart, Henriёtte & Molendijk, Arie
1999Negation and the temporal structure of narrative discourse. Journal of Semantics 16(1): 1–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tamm, Anne
2011Cross-categorial spatial case in the Finnic nonfinite system: focus on the absentive TAM semantics and pragmatics of the Estonian inessive m-formative nonfinites. Linguistics 49(4): 835–944. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trubinskij, Valentin I.
1984Očerki russkogo dialektnogo sintaksisa [Studies in the syntax of Russian dialects]. Leningrad: Leningrad University Press.Google Scholar
Veselinova, Ljuba
2015Not-yet expressions in the languages of the world: A special negator or a separate cross-linguistic category? Presentation at the international conference “Diversity Linguistics: Retrospect and Prospect”, Leipzig, 1–3 May.
Zanuttini, Rafaela
1996On the relevance of tense for sentential negation. In Parameters and Functional Heads. Essays in Comparative Syntax, Adriana Belletti & Luigi Rizzi (eds), 181–207. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar