Commentary published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 20:2 (2017) ► pp.270278
References
Baker, Mark C.
1988Incorporation. A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1989Object sharing and projection in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry 20(4). 513–553.Google Scholar
Benedicto, Elena & Diane Brentari
2004Where did all the arguments go? Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 221. 743–810. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bos, Heleen F.
1998An analysis of main verb and auxiliary agreement in SLN within the theory of Conceptual Semantics (Jackendoff 1990). Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Gallaudet University, Washington D.C., 12–15 November 1998 [Published 2017 in Sign Language & Linguistics, this volume]. DOI logo
Chomsky, Noam
1986Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gökgöz, Kadir
2013The nature of object marking in American Sign Language. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Grose, Donovan, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Katharina Schalber
2007Events and telicity in classifier predicates: A reanalysis of body part classifier predicates in ASL. Lingua 117(7). 1258–1284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harizanov, Boris
2014Clitic doubling at the syntax-morphophonology interface. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 32(4). 1033–1088. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James
1982Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S.
1990Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Julia Krebs, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Dietmar Roehm
2017Two agreement markers in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Sign Language & Linguistics 20(1). 27–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillo-Martin, Diane & Edward S. Klima
1990Pointing out differences: ASL pronouns in syntactic theory. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research. Vol.1: Linguistics, 191–210. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mathur, Gaurav & Christian Rathmann
2012Verb agreement. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, 136–157. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meir, Irit
1995Explaining backwards verbs in ISL: Syntactic-semantic interaction. In Heleen Bos & Trude Schermer (eds.), Current trends in sign language research. Proceedings of the Fifth European Congress on Sign Language Research, 105–119. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
1998aThematic structure and verb agreement in Israeli Sign Language. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
2002A cross-modality perspective on verb agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 201. 413–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neidle, Carol, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin, Benjamin Bahan & Robert G. Lee
2000The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew
2011Prospects and challenges for a clitic analysis of (A)SL agreement. Theoretical Linguistics 371(3–4), 173–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padden, Carol A.
1983[1988]Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California PhD dissertation. [Published 1988 in Outstanding dissertations in linguistics, New York: Garland Publishing].Google Scholar
Quadros, Ronice M. de & Diane Lillo-Martin
2010Clause structure. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages (Cambridge Language Surveys), 225–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian C.
2008Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sapountzaki, Galini
2012Agreement auxiliaries. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language. An international handbook, 204–227. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steinbach, Markus & Roland Pfau
2007Grammaticalization of auxiliaries in sign languages. In Pamela Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation. Comparative studies on sign language structure, 303–339. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Preminger, Omer
2009Breaking agreements: Distinguishing agreement and clitic doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry 40(4). 619–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quadros, Ronice M. de & Josep Quer
2008Back to back(wards) and moving on: On agreement, auxiliaries and verb classes in sign languages. In Ronice M. de Quadros (ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unravelling the past, present and future. Forty-five papers and three posters from the 9th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference, Florianópolis, Brazil, December 2006. Petrópolis: Editora Arara Azul. [Available at: [URL]].
Steinbach, Markus
2011What do agreement auxiliaries reveal about the grammar of sign language agreement? Theoretical Linguistics 37(3–4). 209–221.Google Scholar
Steinbach, Markus & Edgar Onea
2015A DRT analysis of discourse referents and anaphora resolution in sign language. Journal of Semantics 33(3). 409–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie. B.
2008Complex predicates involving events, time and aspect: Is this why sign languages look so similar. In Josep Quer (ed.), Signs of the time: Selected papers from TISLR 8, 217–250. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Gökgöz, Kadir & Hande Sevgi
2020. Aspects of clause structure and morphology in Turkish Sign Language. In Morphological Complexity within and across Boundaries [Studies in Language Companion Series, 215],  pp. 316 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.