Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-6c8bd87754-qjg4w Total loading time: 0.518 Render date: 2022-01-19T14:41:28.716Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Andrew Radford
Affiliation:
University of Essex
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Minimalist Syntax
Exploring the Structure of English
, pp. 485 - 497
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

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

Abney, S. P. (1987) ‘The English Noun Phrase in Its Sentential Aspect’, PhD diss., MIT
Ackema, P. (2001) ‘On the relation between V-to-I and the structure of the inflectional paradigm’, The Linguistic Review 18: 233–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acquaviva, P. (2002) ‘The morphological dimension of polarity licensing’, Linguistics 40: 925–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adger, D. (2003) Core Syntax: A Minimalist Approach, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Agbayani, B. (2000) ‘Wh-subjects in English and the Vacuous Movement Hypothesis’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 703–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aissen, J. (1996) ‘Pied-piping, abstract agreement and functional projections in Tzotzil’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14: 447–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akmajian, A. and Heny, F. (1975) An Introduction to the Principles of Transformational Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Alexiadou, A. and Anagnostopoulou, E. (2001) ‘The subject-in-situ generalization and the role of case in driving computations’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 193–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexopoulou, T. and Kolliakou, D. (2002) ‘On Linkhood, Topicalisation and Clitic Left Dislocation’, Journal of Linguistics 38: 193–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antony, L. and Hornstein, N. (2002) Chomsky and His Critics, Blackwell, Oxford
Aronoff, M. (1976) Word Formation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Aronoff, M. and Fuhrhop, N. (2002) ‘Restricting suffix combinations in German and English: closing suffixes and the monosuffix constraint’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 451–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, M. (2003) Unpublished course handouts, University of Essex
Authier, J.-M. (1991) ‘V-governed expletives, case theory and the projection principle’, Linguistic Inquiry 22: 721–40Google Scholar
Baker, C. L. (1970) ‘Notes on the description of English questions: the role of an abstract question morpheme’, Foundations of Language 6: 197–219Google Scholar
Baker, M. (1988) Incorporation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Baltin, M. (1995) ‘Floating quantifiers, PRO and predication’, Linguistic Inquiry 26: 199–248Google Scholar
Baltin, M. (2002) ‘Movement to the higher V is remnant movement’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 653–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltin, M. and Collins, C. (eds.) (2001) The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, Blackwell, Oxford
Barss, A. (2001) ‘Syntactic reconstruction effects’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.), pp. 670–96CrossRef
Basilico, D. (2003) ‘The topic of small clauses’, Linguistic Inquiry 34: 1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejar, S. and Massam, D. (1999) ‘Multiple case checking’, Syntax 2: 65–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A. (1988) ‘The case of unaccusatives’, Linguistic Inquiry 19: 1–34Google Scholar
Belletti, A. and Rizzi, L. (1988) ‘Psych-verbs and θ-theory’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 6: 291–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, J. B. (2001) ‘The DP hypothesis: identifying clausal properties in the nominal domain’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.) pp. 536–61
Bobaljik, J. (1995) ‘Morphosyntax: the Syntax of Verbal Inflection’, PhD diss., MIT
Bobaljik, J. D. (2000) ‘The rich agreement hypothesis in review’, draft manuscript, McGill University (http://www.msgill.ca/Linguistics/faculty/bobaljik/)
Bobaljik, J. (2002) ‘A-chains at the PF-interface: copies and “covert” movement’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 197–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C. (2000) ‘A note on Contraction’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 357–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C. (2001) ‘Scope reconstruction and A-movement’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 503–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C. and Stjepanović, S. (2001) ‘Head-ing towards PF’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 345–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borsley, R. (2002) ‘Wh-phrases in Minimalism’, unpublished paper, University of Essex
Bošković, Ž. (1997) ‘On certain violations of the superiority condition, AgrO and economy of derivation’, Journal of Linguistics 33: 227–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž. (2001) On the Nature of the Syntax-Phonology Interface: Cliticization and Related Phenomena, Elsevier, Amsterdam
Bošković, Ž. (2002a) ‘On multiple wh-fronting’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 351–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž. (2002b) ‘A-Movement and the EPP’, Syntax 5: 167–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1988) ‘The “no negative evidence” problem: how do children avoid an overly general grammar?’, in J. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining Language Universals, Blackwell, Oxford
Bowers, J. (1993) ‘The syntax of predication’, Linguistic Inquiry 24: 591–656Google Scholar
Bowers, J. (2002) ‘Transitivity’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 183–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braine, M. D. S. (1971) ‘Three suggestions regarding grammatical analyses of children's language’, in C. A. Ferguson and D. I. Slobin (eds.), Studies of Child Language Development, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 421–9
Branigan, P. (1992) ‘Subjects and Complementisers’, PhD diss., MIT
Branigan, P. and MacKenzie, M. (2002) ‘Altruism, A-movement and object agreement in Innu-aim∘un’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 385–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, M. (1995) A Radically Minimalist Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Brown, K. (1991) ‘Double modals in Hawick Scots’, in P. Trudgill and J. K. Chambers (eds.), Dialects of English, Longman, London, pp. 74–103
Brown R., Cazden, C. and Bellugi, U. (1968) ‘The child's grammar from I to III’, in J. P. Hill (ed.), Minnesota Symposium on Child Development, vol. 2, pp. 28–73
Brown, R. and Hanlon, C. (1970) ‘Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech’, in J. R. Hayes (ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language, Wiley, New York, pp. 11–53
Burton, S. and Grimshaw, J. (1992) ‘Coordination and VP-internal subjects’, Linguistic Inquiry 23: 305–13Google Scholar
Burzio, L. (1986) Italian Syntax, Reidel, Dordrecht. Carnie, A. (2000) ‘On the definition of X° and XP’, Syntax 3: 59–106Google Scholar
Carrier, J. and Randall, J. H. (1992) ‘The argument structure and syntactic structure of resul tatives’, Linguistic Inquiry 23: 173–234Google Scholar
Carstens, V. (2000) ‘Concord in Minimalist Theory’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 319–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carstens, V. (2001) ‘Multiple agreement and case deletion: against -(in)completeness’, Syntax 4: 147–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, L. (1997) On the Typology of Wh-Questions, Garland, New York. Cheng, L. and Rooryck, J. (2000) ‘Licensing Wh-in-situ’, Syntax 3: 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Chomsky, N. (1968) Interview with S. Hamshire in The Listener, May 1968
Chomsky, N. (1970) ‘Remarks on nominalisation’, in R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Ginn, Waltham, Mass, pp. 184– 221
Chomsky, N. (1972) Language and Mind (enlarged edition), Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York
Chomsky, N. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht
Chomsky, N. (1982) Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Chomsky, N. (1986a) Knowledge of Language: its Nature, Origin and Use, Praeger, New York
Chomsky, N. (1986b) Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Chomsky, N. (1993) ‘A minimalist program for linguistic theory’, in Hale and Keyser (eds.), pp. 1–52 (reprinted as chapter 3 of Chomsky 1995)
Chomsky, N. (1995) The Minimalist Program, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Chomsky, N. (1998) Minimalist Inquiries: the Framework, MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics, no. 15 (also published in R. Martin, D. Michaels and J. Uriagereka (eds.) (2000) Step by Step: Essays on Minimalism in Honor of Howard Lasnik, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 89–155)
Chomsky, N. (1999) Derivation by Phase, MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics, no. 18 (also published in M. Kenstowicz (ed.) (2001) Ken Hale: a Life in Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1–52)
Chomsky, N. (2001) ‘Beyond Explanatory Adequacy’, unpublished manuscript, MIT
Chomsky, N. (2002) On Nature and Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Chomsky, N. and Lasnik, H. (1977) ‘Filters and Control’, Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. and Lasnik, H. (1995) ‘The theory of principles and parameters’, in Chomsky 1995, pp. 13–127
Chung, S. (1994) ‘Wh-agreement and “Referentiality” in Chamorro’, Linguistic Inquiry 25: 1–45Google Scholar
Chung, S. (1998) The Design of Agreement: Evidence from Chamorro, University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Cinque, G. (1994) ‘Evidence for partial N-movement in the Romance DP’, in G. Cinque, J. Koster, J.-Y. Pollock, L. Rizzi and R. Zanuttini (eds.), Towards Universal Grammar: Studies in Honor of Richard Kayne, Georgetown University Press, Washington DC, pp. 85–110
Cinque, G. (1999) Adverbs and Functional Heads, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Citko, B. (2002) ‘(Anti)reconstruction effects in free relatives: a new argument against the Comp account’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 507–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, P. (1982) Imbabura Quechua, North-Holland, The Hague
Cole, P. and Hermon, G. (2000) ‘Partial wh-movement: evidence from Malay’, in Lutz, Müuller and von Stechow (eds.), pp. 101–30CrossRef
Collins, C. (1997) Local Economy, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Collins, C. and Branigan, P. (1997) ‘Quotative Inversion’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15: 1–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contreras, H. (1986) ‘Spanish bare NPs and the ECP’, in I. Bordelois, H. Contreras and K. Zagona (eds.), Generative Studies in Spanish Syntax, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 25–49
Contreras, J. (1987) ‘Small clauses in Spanish and English’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5: 225–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cormack, A. and Smith, N. (1999) ‘Where is a sign merged?’, Glot International 4, 6: 21
Cormack, A. and Smith, N. (2000a) ‘Head Movement and negation in English’, Transactions of the Philological Society 98: 49–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cormack, A. and Smith, N. (2000b) ‘Fronting: the Syntax and Pragmatics of “Focus” and “Topic”’, UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 20: 387–417Google Scholar
Cornilescu, A. (2001) ‘Romanian nominalizations: case and aspectual structure’, Journal of Linguistics 37: 467–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, J. (2001) ‘Postverbal subjects and agreement in unaccusative contexts in European Portuguese’, The Linguistic Review 18: 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crain, S. and Pietroski, P. (2002) ‘Why language acquisition is a snap’, The Linguistic Review 19: 163–83Google Scholar
Culicover, P. (1991) ‘Topicalization, inversion and complementiser in English’, in D. Delftto, M. Everaert, A. Evers and F. Stuurman (eds.), OTS Working Papers: Going Romance and Beyond, University of Utrecht, pp. 1–45
Culicover, P. and Jackendoff, R. (2001) ‘Control is not movement’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 493–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culicover, P. and Levine, R. D. (2001) ‘Stylistic Inversion in English: a reconsideration’, Natural Language and Linguisitc Theory 19: 283–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtiss, S. (1977) Genie: a Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern Day ‘Wild Child’, Academic Press, London
Davies, W. and Dubinsky, S. (2003) ‘On extraction from NPs’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dayal, V. (2002) ‘Single-pair versus multiple-pair answers: wh-in-situ and scope’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 512–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Déchaine, R.-M. and Wiltschko, M. (2002) ‘Decomposing pronouns’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 409–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dikken, M. (2001) ‘Pluringulars, pronouns and quirky agreement’, The Linguistic Review 18: 19–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dikken, M. and Giannakidou, A. (2002) ‘From hell to polarity: “Aggressively non-D-linked” wh-phrases as polarity items’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 31–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denham, K. (2000) ‘Optional wh-movement in Babine-Witsuwit'en’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 199–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (2000) ‘Categories of the Noun Phrase in Jarawara’, Journal of Linguistics 36: 487–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drubig, H. N. (2003) ‘Toward a typology of focus and focus constructions’, Linguistics 41: 1–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dukes, M. (2000) ‘Agreement in Chamorro’, Journal of Linguistics 36: 575–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
du Plessis, H. (1977) ‘Wh-movement in Afrikaans’, Linguistic Inquiry 8: 211–22Google Scholar
Embick, D. and Noyer, R. (2001) ‘Movement operations after Syntax’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 555–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, S. and Seeley, D. (1999) ‘Specifying the GF “subject”, eliminating A-chains and the EPP with a derivational model’, ms. University of Michigan
Ernst, T. (1991) ‘On the scope principle’, Linguistic Inquiry 22: 750–6Google Scholar
Fabb, N. (1988) ‘English suffixation is constrained only by selectional restrictions’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6: 527–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, G. and Mahajan, A. (2000) ‘Towards a minimalist theory of wh-expletives, whcopying and successive cyclicity’, in Lutz, Müuller and von Stechow (eds.), pp. 195–230
Fasold, R. (1980) ‘The relation between black and white speech in the south’, ms., School of Languages and Linguistics, Georgetown University, Washington DC
Felser, C. (1999a) Verbal Complement Clauses: a Minimalist Study of Direct Perception Constructions, Benjamins, Amsterdam
Felser, C. (1999b) ‘Perception and control: A Minimalist analysis of English direct perception complements’, Journal of Linguistics 34: 351–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felser, C. (2001) ‘Wh-copying, phases and successive cyclicity’, draft ms, University of Essex
Fillmore, C. J. (1968) ‘The case for case’, in E. Bach and R. T. Harms (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 1–88
Fillmore, C. J. (1972) ‘Subjects, speakers and roles’, in D. Davidson and G. Harman (eds.), Semantics of Natural Language, Reidel, Dordrecht. Fitzpatrick, J. M. (2002) ‘On Minimalist approaches to the locality of movement’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 443–63CrossRef
Fodor, J. D. and Crowther, C. (2002) ‘Understanding stimulus poverty arguments’, The Linguistic Review 19: 105–45Google Scholar
Fox, D. (2000) Economy and Semantic Interpretation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Frampton, J. and Gutmann, S. (1999) ‘Cyclic computation, a computationally effcient minimalist syntax’, Syntax 2: 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, R. and Vijay-Shanker, K. (2001) ‘Primitive c-command’, Syntax 4: 164–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freidin, R. and Vergnaud, J. R. (2001) ‘Exquisite connections: some remarks on the evolution of linguistic theory’, Lingua 111: 639–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu, J., Roeper, T. and Borer, H. (2001) ‘The VP within process nominals: evidence from adverbs and the VP anaphor do so’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 549–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodall, G. (1999) ‘Accusative case in passives’, Linguistics 37: 1–12Google Scholar
Green, L. (1998) ‘Semantic and syntactic patterns in African American English’, ms., University of Massachusetts
Grewendorf, G. (2001) ‘Multiple wh-fronting’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 87–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, J. (1993) ‘Minimal Projection, Heads, and Optimality’, draft ms., Rutgers University
Groat, E. and O'Neil, J. (1996) ‘Spell-out at the LF interface’, in W. Abraham, S. D. Epstein, H. Thráinsson and C. J.-W. Zwart (eds.), Minimal Ideas, Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 113–39CrossRef
Gruber, J. S. (1965) ‘Studies in Lexical Relations’, PhD diss., MIT
Gruber, J. S. (1976) Lexical Structures in Syntax and Semantics, North-Holland, Amsterdam
Guasti, M. T. (2002) Language Acquisition: the Growth of Grammar, Bradford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Guasti, M. T., Thornton, R. and Wexler, K. (1995) ‘Negation in children's questions: the case of English’, in B. MacLaughlin and S. McEwen (eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Cascadilla Press, Somerville, Mass, pp. 228–39
Guilfoyle, E. (1983) ‘Habitual aspect in Hiberno-English’, McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 1: 22–32Google Scholar
Guilfoyle, E., Hung, H. and Travis, L. (1992) ‘Spec of IP and spec of VP: two subjects in Austronesian languages’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10: 375–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, L. (1992) Theory and Description in Generative Syntax: a Case Study of West Flemish, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Haegeman, L. (1994, 2nd edition) Introduction to Government and Binding Theory, Blackwell, Oxford
Haegeman, L. (1995) The Syntax of Negation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Haegeman, L. (2000) ‘Inversion, non-adjacent inversion and adjuncts in CP’, Transactions of the Philological Society 98: 121–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagstrom, P. A. (1998) ‘Decomposing Questions’, PhD diss, MIT
Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J. (1991) On the Syntax of Argument Structure, Lexicon Project Working Papers, MIT, Center for Cognitive Science, Cambridge, Mass
Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J. (1993a) ‘On argument structure and the lexical expression of semantic relations’, in Hale and Keyser (eds.), pp. 53–109
Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J. (1993b) (eds.) The View from Building 20, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J. (1994) ‘Constraints on argument structure’, in B. Lust, M. Su ~ner and J. Whitman (eds.), Heads, Projections and Learnability, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ vol. 1, pp. 53–71
Halle, M. and Marantz, A. (1993) ‘Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection’, in Hale and Keyser (eds.), pp. 111–76
Han, C.-H. (2001) ‘Force, negation and imperatives’, The Linguistic Review, 18: 289–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. (1986) ‘Expanding the superstrate: habitual aspect markers in Atlantic Englishes’, English World-Wide 7: 171–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (2001) ‘Why are categories adjacent?’, Journal of Linguistics 37: 1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, A. (1995) Belfast English and Standard English: Dialect Variation and Parameter-Setting, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Hiemstra, I. (1986) ‘Some aspects of wh-questions in Frisian’, North-Western European Language Evolution (NOWELE) 8: 97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, A. (2000) ‘Am I unscientifc? A reply to Lappin, Levine and Johnson’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 837–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, N. (1995) Logical Form: from GB to Minimalism, Blackwell, Oxford
Hornstein, N. (2000) ‘On A-chains: a reply to Brody’, Syntax 3: 129–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, N. and Lightfoot, D. (eds.) (1994) Verb Movement, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Huang, C.-T. J. (1982) ‘Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar’, PhD diss., MIT
Huang, C.-T. J. (1993) ‘Reconstruction and the structure of VP: some theoretical consequences’, Linguistic Inquiry 24: 103–38Google Scholar
Hurford, J. (1991) ‘The evolution of the critical period for language acquisition’, Cognition 40: 159–201CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hyams, N. (1986) Language Acquisition and the Theory of Parameters, Reidel, Dordrecht
Hyams, N. (1992) ‘A reanalysis of null subjects in child language’, in J. Weissenborn, H. Goodluck and T. Roeper (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Language Acquisition, Erlbaum, London, pp. 249–67
Ingham, R. (2000) ‘Negation and OV order in Late Middle English’, Journal of Linguistics 36: 13–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R. S. (1972) Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Jaeggli, O. and Safir, K. (1989) The Null Subject Parameter, Kluwer, Dordrecht
Johnson, K. (1991) ‘Object positions’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9: 577–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, K. (2002) ‘Restoring exotic co-ordinations to normalcy’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 97–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M. A. (1994) Sardinian Syntax, Routledge, London
Julien, M. (2001) ‘The syntax of complex tenses’, The Linguistic Review 18: 125–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kathol, A. (2001) ‘Positional effects in a monostratal grammar of German’, Journal of Linguistics 37: 35–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, R. S. (1984a) Connectedness and Binary Branching, Foris, Dordrecht
Kayne, R. S. (1984b) ‘Principles of particle constructions’, in J. Guéron et al. (eds.) Grammatical Representation, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 101–40
Kayne, R. S. (1989) ‘Facets of Romance past participle agreement’, in P. Benincà (ed.), Dialect Variation and the Theory of Grammar, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 85–103
Kayne, R. S. (1994) The Antisymmetry of Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Kennedy, C. (2002) ‘Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax’, Natural Language andLinguistic Theory 20: 553–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, C. and Merchant, J. (2000) ‘Attributive comparative deletion’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 89–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyser, S. J. and Roeper, T. (1992) ‘Re: the abstract clitic hypothesis’, Linguistic Inquiry 23: 89–125Google Scholar
Kimball, J. and Aissen, J. (1971) ‘I think, you think, he think’, Linguistic Inquiry 2: 241–6Google Scholar
Kishimoto, H. (1992) ‘LF pied piping: evidence from Sinhala’, Gengo Kenkyu 102: 46–87Google Scholar
Kishimoto, H. (2000) ‘Indefinite pronouns and overt N-raising’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 557–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, Y. (1986) ‘Subjects in English and Japanese’, PhD diss., University of Massachusetts
Klima, E. S. (1964) ‘Negation in English’, in J. A. Fodor and J. J. Katz (eds.), The Structure of Language, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 246–323
Koeneman, O. (2000) ‘The Flexible Nature of Verb Movement’, PhD diss., University of Utrecht
Koizumi, M. (1993) ‘Object agreement phrases and the split VP hypothesis’, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18: 99–148Google Scholar
Koizumi, M. (1995) ‘Phrase Structure in Minimalist Syntax’, PhD diss., MIT
Koopman, H. and Sportiche, D. (1991) ‘The position of subjects’, Lingua 85: 211–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuroda, Y. (1988) ‘Whether we agree or not’, Lingvisticae Investigationes 12: 1–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1969) ‘Contraction, deletion and inherent variability of the English copula’, Language 45: 715–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, I. (1999) ‘Elements of Control’, PhD diss., MIT
Landau, I. (2001) ‘Control and Extraposition: the case of Super-Equi’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 109–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, I. (2002) ‘(Un)interpretable Neg in Comp’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 465–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lappin, S., Levine, R. D. and Johnson, D. E. (2000a) ‘Topic … comment: the structure of unscientifc revolutions’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 665–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lappin, S., Levine, R. D. and Johnson, D. E. (2000b) ‘The revolution confused: a response to our critics’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 873–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lappin, S., Levine, R. D. and Johnson, D. E. (2001) ‘The revolution maximally confused’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 901–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, R. (1988) ‘On the double object construction’, Linguistic Inquiry 19: 335–91Google Scholar
Larson, R. (1990) ‘Double objects revisited: reply to Jackendoff’, Linguistic Inquiry 21: 589–632Google Scholar
Larson, R. (1991) ‘Promise and the theory of control’, Linguistic Inquiry 2: 103–39Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. (1995) ‘Verbal Morphology: Syntactic Structures meets the Minimalist Program’, in H. Campos and P. Kempchinsky (eds.), Evolution and Revolution in Linguistic Theory, Georgetown University Press, Georgetown, pp. 251–75
Lasnik, H. (1998) ‘Some reconstruction riddles’, in Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 5: 83–98, Penn Linguistics Circle, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Lasnik, H. (1999) ‘Chains of arguments’, in S. D. Epstein and N. Hornstein (eds.), Working Minimalism, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 189–215
Lasnik, H. (2000) Syntactic Structures Revisited: Contemporary Lectures on Classic Transformational Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (with M. Depiante and A. Stepanov)
Lasnik, H. (2001) ‘A note on the EPP’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 356–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, H. and Saito, M. (1991) ‘On the subject of infinitives’, Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 27: 324–43, University of Chicago
Lasnik, H. and Sobin, N. (2000) ‘The Who/Whom Puzzle: on the preservation of an archaic feature’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 343–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, H. and Uriagereka, J. (2002) ‘On the poverty of the challenge’, The Linguistic Review 19: 147–50Google Scholar
Lebeaux, D. (1991) ‘Relative clauses, licensing and the nature of derivation’, in S. Rothstein (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 25: Perspectives on Phrase Structure, Academic Press, New York, pp. 209–39
Lebeaux, D. (1995) ‘Where does Binding Theory apply?’, University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 3: 63–88Google Scholar
Lechner, W. (2001) ‘Reduced and phrasal comparatives’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 683–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legate, J. A. (2002) ‘Some interface properties of the phase’, unpublished paper, MIT
Legate, J. A. and Yang, C. D. (2002) ‘Empirical re-assessment of stimulus poverty arguments’, The Linguistic Review 19: 151–62Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1967) Biological Foundations of Language, Wiley, New York
Levin, B. and Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995) Unaccusativity at the Syntax-Lexical Semantic Interface, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Longobardi, G. (1994) ‘Reference and proper names’, Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609–66Google Scholar
Longobardi, G. (1996) ‘The syntax of N-raising: a minimalist theory’, OTS Working Papers no. 5, Research Institute for Language and Speech, Utrecht
Longobardi, G. (2001) ‘The structure of DPs: some principles, parameters and problems’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.), pp. 562–603CrossRef
López, L. (2001) ‘On the (non)complementarity of θ-Theory and Checking Theory’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 694–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, U., M üuller, G. and von Stechow, A. (eds.) (2000) Wh-Scope Marking, Benjamins, Amsterdam
Lyons, C. (1999) Definiteness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Martin, R. (2001) ‘Null case and the distribution of PRO’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 141–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, J. (2000) ‘Quantifier Float and Wh-Movement in an Irish English’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 57–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, J. (2001) ‘The morphosyntax of WH-extraction in Irish’, Journal of Linguistics 37: 67–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, D. (1989) ‘Partial and multiple wh-movement’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7: 565–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNally, L. (1992) ‘VP-coordination and the VP-internal subject hypothesis’, Linguistic Inquiry 23: 336–41Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (1966) ‘Developmental Psycholinguistics’, in F. Smith and G. A. Miller (eds.), The Genesis of Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 15–84
Marantz, A. (1984) On the Nature of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Marcus, G. F. (1993) ‘Negative evidence in language acquisition’, Cognition 46: 53–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, J. and Perlmutter, D. M. (2000) ‘What does it take to be a dative subject?’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 373–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, J. L. and Travis, L. (1989) ‘Limits on negative information in language input’, Journal of Child Language 16: 531–52CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moro, A. (1997) The Raising of Predicates: Predicative Noun Phrases and the Theory of Clause Structure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Murasugi, K. and Saito, M. (1994) ‘Adjunction and cyclicity’, Proceedings of the 13th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, pp. 302–17
Nakajima, H. (2001) ‘Verbs in locative constructions and the generative lexicon’, The Linguistic Review 18: 43–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Namai, K. (2000) ‘Gender features in English’, Linguistics 38: 771–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nasu, N. (2001) ‘Associating EPP with ⊘-completeness’, Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistic Society 31: 351–67Google Scholar
Nasu, N. (2002) ‘Aspects of the Syntax of A-Movement: a Study of English Infinitival Contructions and Related Phenomena’, PhD diss., University of Essex
Nunes, J. (1999) ‘Linearization of chains and phonetic realisation of chain links’, in S. D. Epstein and N. Hornstein (eds.), Working Minimalism, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 217–49
Nunes, J. (2001) ‘Sideward movement’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 303–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, J. and Uriagereka, J. (2000) ‘Cyclicity and extraction domains’, Syntax 3: 20–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ochi, M. (1999) ‘Multiple spell-out and PF-adjacency’, Proceedings of the North-Eastern Linguistic Society 29
Oya, T. (2002) ‘Reflexives and resultatives: some differences between English and German’, Linguistics 40: 961–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, S. (1999) ‘On the behaviour of definite articles in Chamicuro’, Language 75: 552–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, D. (1987) ‘Wh-in-situ: movement and unselective binding’, in E. J. Reuland and A. G. B. ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 98–129
Pesetsky, D. (1995) Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Pesetsky, D. (1997) ‘Optimality Theory and Syntax: Movement and Pronunciation’, in D. Archangeli and D. T. Langendoen (eds.), Optimality Theory: an Overview, Black well, Oxford, pp. 134–70
Pesetsky, D. (1998) ‘Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation’, in P. Barbosa
D. Fox, P. Hagstrom, M. McGinnis and D. Pesetsky (eds.), Is the Best Good Enough? MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 337–83
Pesetsky, D. (2000) Phrasal Movement and Its Kin, MIT Press, Cambridge Mass
Pesetsky, D. and Torrego, E. (2001) ‘T-to-C movement: causes and consequences’, in M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: a Life in Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 355–426
Phillips, C. (2003) ‘Linear order and constituency’, Linguistic Inquiry 34: 37–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (2000) ‘The metric of open-mindedness’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 18: 859–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picallo, M. C. (1991) ‘Nominals and nominalization in Catalan’, Probus 3: 279–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platzack, C. and Holmberg, A. (1989) ‘The role of AGR and finiteness’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 44: 101–17Google Scholar
Polinsky, M. and Potsdam, E. (2001) ‘Long-distance agreement and Topic in Tsez’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 583–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollock, J.-Y. (1989) ‘Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP’, Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365–424Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. (1966) ‘On so-called pronouns in English’, in F. Dinneen (ed.), Nineteenth Monograph on Language and Linguistics, Georgetown University Press, Washington DC (reprinted in D. Reibel and S. Schane (eds.) (1969) Modern Studies in English, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 201–24)
Postal, P. M. (1974) On Raising, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Potts, C. (2002) ‘The syntax and semantics of as-parentheticals’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 623–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pullum, G. K. and Scholz, B. C. (2002) ‘Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments’, The Linguistic Review 19: 9–50Google Scholar
Radford, A. (1981) Transformational Syntax, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Radford, A. (1988) Transformational Grammar, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Radford, A. (1993) ‘Head-hunting: on the trail of the nominal Janus’, in G. Corbett, N. M. Fraser and S. McGlashan (eds.), Heads in Grammatical Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 73–11CrossRef
Radford, A. (1994) ‘The syntax of questions in child English’, Journal of Child Language 21: 211–36CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radford, A. (1997a) Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Radford, A. (1997b) Syntax: a Minimalist Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Radford, A., Atkinson, M., Britain, D., Clahsen, H. and Spencer, A. (1999) Linguistics: an Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Ramat, P. (1999) ‘Linguistic categories and linguists’ categorizations', Linguistics 37: 157–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reintges, C. H, LeSourd, P. and Chung, S. (2002) ‘Movement, wh-agreement and apparent wh-in-situ’, paper presented to Workshop on Wh-Movement, University of Leiden, December 2002
Reuland, E. (2000) ‘Revolution, discovery and an elementary principle of logic’, NaturalLanguage and Linguistic Theory 18: 843–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuland, E. (2001a) ‘Primitives of Binding’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 439–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuland, E. (2001b) ‘Confusion compounded’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 879–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuland, E. and Everaert, M. (2001) ‘Deconstructing Binding’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.), pp. 634–70CrossRef
Richards, N. (1997) ‘What moves where when in which language?’ PhD diss., MIT
Rickford, J. R. (1986) ‘Social contact and linguistic diffusion: Hiberno-English and New World Black English’, Language 62: 245–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, E. (1991) ‘Two functional categories in noun phrases: evidence from Modern Hebrew’, in S. Rothstein (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, Academic Press, New York, pp. 37–62
Rizzi, L. (1992) ‘Early null subjects and root null subjects’, Geneva Generative Papers vol. 0, pp. 102–14
Rizzi, L. (1997) ‘The fne structure of the left periphery’, in L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 281–337
Rizzi, L. (2000) ‘Remarks on early null subjects’, in M.-A. Freidemann and L. Rizzi (eds.), The Acquisition of Syntax, London, Longman, pp. 269–92
Rizzi, L. (2001a) ‘Relativized minimality effects’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.), pp. 89–110
Rizzi, L. (2001b) ‘On the position “Int(errogative)” in the left periphery of the clause’, in G. Cinque and G. Salvi (eds.), Current Issues in Italian Syntax, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 287–96
Rizzi, L. (2003) ‘Locality and Left Periphery’, to appear in A. Belletti (ed.), Structures and Beyond: the Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Roberts, I. (1993) Verbs and Diachronic Syntax, Kluwer, Dordrecht
Roberts, I. (1994) ‘Two types of head movement in Romance’, in Hornstein and Lightfoot (eds.), pp. 207–42CrossRef
Roberts, I. (1997) ‘Restructuring, head movement and locality’, Linguistic Inquiry 28: 423–60Google Scholar
Roberts, I. (1998) ‘Have/Be Raising, Move F and Procrastinate’, Linguistic Inquiry 29: 113–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. (2000) ‘Caricaturing dissent’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 849–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. (2001a) ‘Who has confused what? More on Lappin, Levine and Johnson’, NaturalLanguage and Linguistic Theory 19: 887–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. (2001b) ‘Head Movement’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.), pp. 113–47
Roberts, I. (2002) Paper on Verb Movement presented at visiting speaker seminar, University of Essex
Rohrbacher, B. (1999) Morphology-Driven Syntax: a theory of V-to-I raising and pro-drop, Benjamins, Amsterdam
Romero, M. (1997) ‘The correlation between scope reconstruction and connectivity effects’, in E. Curtiss, J. Lyle and G. Webster (eds.), Proceedings of the XVI West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics, CLSI, Stanford, pp. 351–65
Rosen, S. T. (1990) Argument Structure and Complex Predicates, Garland, New York
Ross, J. R. (1967) ‘Constraints on Variables in Syntax’, PhD diss., MIT (published as Infinite Syntax! by Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ, 1986)
Ross, J. R. (1970) ‘On declarative sentences’, in R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Ginn, Waltham, Mass. pp. 222–72
Runner, J. (1998) Noun Phrase Licensing and Interpretation, Garland, New York
Rymer, R. (1993) Genie: a Scientifc Tragedy, Harper Perennial, New York
Sabel, J. (2002) ‘A minimalist analysis of syntactic islands’, The Linguistic Review 19: 271–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saddy, D. (1991) ‘Wh scope mechanisms in Bahasa Indonesia’, in L. Cheng and H. Demirdache (eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 183–218
Sadock, J. M. (1984) ‘West Greenlandic’, in W. S. Chisholm (ed.), Interrogativity, Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 189–214CrossRef
Safir, K. (1986) Syntactic Chains, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Safir, K. (1993) ‘Perception, selection and structural economy’, Natural Language Semantics 2: 47–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sag, I. (1997) ‘English relative clause constructions’, Journal of Linguistics 33: 431–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, G. (2002) ‘Exploring the richness of the stimulus’, The Linguistic Review 19: 73–104Google Scholar
Sauerland, U. (1998) ‘The Meaning of Chains’, PhD diss., MIT
Sauerland, U. and Elbourne, P. (2002) ‘Total reconstruction, PF movement and derivational order’, Linguistic Inquiry 33: 283–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, B. C. and Pullum, G. K. (2002) ‘Searching for arguments to support linguistic nativism’, The Linguistic Review 19: 185–223Google Scholar
Schüutze, C. (2001) ‘On the nature of default case’, Syntax 4: 205–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seppüanen, A. and Trotta, J. (2000) ‘The wh+that pattern in present-day English’, in J. M. Kirk (ed.), Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English, Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp. 161–75
Shima, E. (2000) ‘A preference for Move over Merge’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 375–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. A. (1991) ‘Icelandic case-marked PRO and the licensing of lexical arguments’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9: 327–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. A. (1996) ‘Icelandic finite verb agreement’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 57: 1–46Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. A. (2002) ‘To be an oblique subject: Russian vs. Icelandic’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 691–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, N. (1998) ‘Jackdaws, sex and language acquisition’, Glot International 3, 7: 7
Smith, N. (1999) Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Smith, N. and Cormack, A. (2002) ‘Indeterminacy, inference, iconicity and interpretation: aspects of the grammar-pragmatics interface’, in M. Makri-Tsilipakou (ed.), Selected Papers on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, pp. 38–53
Sobin, N. (2002) ‘The Comp-trace effect, the adverb effect, and minimal CP’, Journal of Linguistics 38: 527–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2000) ‘Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs’, Language 76: 859–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speas, P. (1986) ‘Adjunction and Projections in Syntax’, PhD diss., MIT, Cambridge, Mass
Spencer, A. J. (1991) Morphological Theory, Blackwell, Oxford
Sportiche, D. (1988) ‘A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure’, Linguistic Inquiry 19: 425–49Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. (1998) ‘Movement, agreement and case’, in Partitions and Atoms of Clause Structure, Routledge, London, pp. 88–243
Stepanov, A. (2001) ‘Late adjunction and minimalist phrase structure’, Syntax 4: 94–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, R., Schachter, P. and Hall Partee, B. (1973) The Major Syntactic Structures of English, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York
Stowell, T. (1981) ‘Origins of Phrase Structure’, PhD dissertation, MIT
Stowell, T. (1982) ‘The tense of infinitives’, Linguistic Inquiry 13: 561–70Google Scholar
Stroik, T. (1990) ‘Adverbs as V-Sisters’, Linguistic Inquiry 21: 654–61Google Scholar
Stroik, T. (2001) ‘On the light verb hypothesis’, Linguistic Inquiry 32: 362–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su ~ner, M. (1994) ‘V-movement and the licensing of argumental wh-phrases in Spanish’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12: 335–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su ~ner, M. (2000) ‘The syntax of direct quotes with special reference to Spanish and English’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 525–78Google Scholar
Svenonius, P. (2002a) ‘Case is uninterpretable aspect’, http://www.hum.uit.no/a/svenonius/paperspage.html
Svenonius, P. (2002b) ‘Icelandic case and the structure of events’, http://www.hum.uit.no/a/svenonius/paperspage.html
Tallerman, M. O. (1993) ‘Case assignment and the order of functional projections in Welsh’, in A. Siewierska (ed.), Eurotyp Working Papers, Programme in Language Typology, European Science Foundation, pp. 1–41
Taraldsen, T. (1990) ‘D-projections and N-projections in Norwegian’, in M. Nespor and J. Mascarò (eds.), Grammar in Progress, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 419–31CrossRef
Ten Hacken, P. (2001) Review of Radford 1997a/b, Natural Language Engineering 7/1
Thomas, M. (2002) ‘Development of the concept of “the poverty of stimulus”’, The LinguisticReview 19: 51–71Google Scholar
Thornton, R. (1995) ‘Referentiality and Wh-Movement in Child English: juvenile D-Link uency’, Language Acquisition 4: 139–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. (1988) ‘The origins and development of periphrastic auxiliary do: a case of destigmatisation’, Dutch Working Papers in English Language and Linguistics 3: 1–30Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. (1972) A History of English Syntax, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York
Travis, L. (1984) ‘Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation’, PhD diss., MIT
Ura, H. (1993) ‘On feature-checking for wh-traces’, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18: 243–80Google Scholar
Ura, H. (2001) ‘Local economy and generalized pied-piping’, The Linguistic Review 18: 169–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, J. (1988) ‘On Government’, PhD diss., University of Connecticut
Uriagereka, J. (1998) Rhyme and Reason, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Uriagereka, J. (2000) ‘On the emptiness of “design” polemics’, Natural Language andLinguistic Theory 18: 863–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, J. (2001) ‘Cutting derivational options’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 891–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vainikka, A. and Levy, Y. (1999) ‘Empty subjects in Finnish and Hebrew’, Natural Languageand Linguistic Theory 17: 613–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valois, D. (1991) ‘The Syntax of DP’, PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles
Vikner, S. (1995) Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in Germanic Languages, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Vikner, S. (1997) ‘V°-to-I° movement and inflection for person in all tenses’, in L. Haegeman (ed.), The New Comparative Syntax, Longman, London, pp. 189–213
Wakelin, M. F. (1977, 2nd edn.) English Dialects: an Introduction, Athlone, London
Watanabe, A. (2001) ‘Wh-in-situ languages’, in Baltin and Collins (eds.), pp. 203–25CrossRef
Wexler, K. (1994) ‘Optional Infinitives, Head Movement and the Economy of Derivations’, in Hornstein and Lightfoot (eds.), pp. 305–50
Williams, E. (1994) Thematic Structure in Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass
Willis, D. (2000) ‘On the distribution of resumptive pronouns and wh-trace in Welsh’, Journal of Linguistics 36: 531–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltschko, M. (2001) ‘The syntax of pronouns: evidence from Halkomelem Salish’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 157–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfram, W. (1971) ‘Black-white speech differences revisited’, in W. Wolfram and N. H. Clark (eds.), Black-White Speech Relationships, Center For Applied Linguistics, Washington DC, pp. 139–61
Woolford, E. (1991) ‘VP-internal subjects in VSO and nonconfgurational languages’, Linguistic Inquiry 22: 503–40Google Scholar
Xu, L. (2003) ‘Choice between the overt and the covert’, Transactions of the PhilologicalSociety 101: 81–107Google Scholar
Yang, C. D. (1999) ‘Unordered Merge and its linearization’, Syntax 1: 38–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zagona, K. (1987) Verb Phrase Syntax, Kluwer, Dordrecht
Zwart, C. J. -W. (2001) ‘Syntactic and phonological verb movement’, Syntax 4: 34–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, A. (2002) ‘I wonder what kind of construction that this kind of example illustrates’, in D. Beaver, L. D. Casillas Martínez, B. Z. Clark and S. Kaufmann (eds.), The Construction of Meaning, CSLI Publications, pp. 219–48

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Andrew Radford, University of Essex
  • Book: Minimalist Syntax
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811319.013
Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Andrew Radford, University of Essex
  • Book: Minimalist Syntax
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811319.013
Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Andrew Radford, University of Essex
  • Book: Minimalist Syntax
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811319.013
Available formats
×