Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:24:11.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gillian Catriona Ramchand, Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first-phase syntax (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 116). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Pp. x+217.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2010

Benjamin Bruening
Benjamin Bruening*
Affiliation:
University of Delaware
*
Author's address:Department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USAbruening@udel.edu
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 46 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 260 - 270
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring sense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel Jay (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi. 2002. Possession and the double object construction. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2, 31–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In Sag, Ivan A. & Szabolcsi, Anna (eds.), Lexical matters, 29–53. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium 21 (University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2), 201–225.Google Scholar
Stechow, Arnim von. 1996. The different readings of wieder ‘again’: A structural account. Journal of Semantics 13.2, 87–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen. 2005. Resultatives under the event–argument homomorphism model of telicity. In Erteschik-Shir, Nomi & Rapoport, Tova (eds.), The syntax of aspect: Deriving thematic and aspectual interpretation, 255–273. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1980. Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 11.1, 203–238.Google Scholar