Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-sv6ng Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T05:20:00.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Donna Jo Napoli and Emily Norwood Rando, Syntactic argumentation. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1979. Pp. xiii + 422. - Scott Soames and David M. Perimutter, Syntactic argumentation and the structure of English. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press1979. Pp. xiii+602.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Constance Cullen
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Hull.

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

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

Akmajian, A. & Heny, F. (1975). An introduction to the principles of transformational syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Berman, A. & Szamosi, M. (1972). Observations on sentential stress. Lg 48. 304325.Google Scholar
Culicover, P. W. (1977). Syntax. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, P. W. (1982). Syntax, 2nd ed.London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Emonds, J. (1976). A transformational approach to English syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. (1980). Linguistic theory in America: the first quarter-century of transformational generative grammar. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Partee, B. (1971). On the requirement that transformations preserve meaning. In Fillmore, C. & Langendoen, T. (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Semantics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar