Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T18:00:41.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There1, there2

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
Notes and Discussions
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , April 1972 , pp. 111 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

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. (1969). On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences. Mimeo by Indiana University Linguistics Circle.Google Scholar
Allan, K. (1971). A note on the source of there in existential sentences. FL 7. 1–18.Google Scholar
Bach, E. (1967). Have and be in English syntax. Lg 43. 462–485.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1968a). The case for case. In Bach, E. & Harms, R. T. (eds.). Universals in linguistic theory. 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1968b). Lexical entries for verbs. FL 4. 373–393.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1967). A note on possessive, existential, and locative sentences. FL 3. 390–396.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1969). Tense and time reference in English. Paper read to Harvard Semantics Festival.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. S. (1967). The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. (Research monograph, 47). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, G. R. (forthcoming). A proposal for constraining deletion.Google Scholar