Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T13:26:30.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

D. Terence Langendoen, The Study of Syntax: the Generative-Transformational Approach to the Structure of American English. (Transatlantic series in linguistics.) New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1969. Pp. 174.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Geoffrey Sampson
Geoffrey Sampson
Affiliation:
The Queen's College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , September 1970 , pp. 267 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bach, E. (1967). Have and be in English syntax. Lg. 43. 462–485.Google Scholar
Bach, E. & Harms, R. T. (eds.) (1968). Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1965). The atomization of meaning. Lg. 41. 555–573.Google Scholar
Chomsky, A. N. (1961). On the notion ‘rule of grammar’. In Jakobson, R. (ed.) Structure of Language and its Mathematical Aspects. Providence: American Mathematical Society, 6–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1969). Deep structure, surface structure, and semantic interpretation. Publication of the Indiana U. Linguistics Club (mimeo).Google Scholar
Cohen, L. J. (1967). Review of Katz (1966). JL 3. 163–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. Bach & Harms, 1968: 1–88.Google Scholar
Jacobs, R. A. & Rosenbaum, P. S. (1968). English Transformational Grammar. Waltham, Mass.: Blaisdell.Google Scholar
Katz, J. J. (1966). The Philosophy of Language. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Katz, J. J. (1967). Recent issues in semantic theory. FL 3. 124–194.Google Scholar
Katz, J. J. & Fodor, J. A. (1963). The structure of a semantic theory. Lg. 39. 170–210.Google Scholar
Katz, J. J. & Postal, P. M. (1964). An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Descriptions. (Research monograph no. 26). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1968). The rôle of semantics in a grammar. In Bach & Harms, 1968: 125–169.Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. (1969). Appendix to a paper by George Lakoff. In Binnick, R. I. et al. (eds.). Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Department of Linguistics, University of Chicago. 138.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1966). Explorations in semantic theory. In Sebeok, T. A. (ed.) Current Trends in Linguistics, vol. 3. The Hague: Mouton. 395–477.Google Scholar