Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-24hb2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T02:35:34.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

III - Linearization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2019

Mónica Cabrera
Affiliation:
Loyola Marymount University, California
José Camacho
Affiliation:
Rutgers University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

A well-studied phenomenon in Spanish (and in Romance languages in general) is clitic placement in constructions with so-called restructuring verbs, such as querer “want,” deber “must,” poder “can/may,” soler (habitual aspect), empezar “begin,” estar “be” – which are sometimes dubbed semi-auxiliary verbs, since they express modality and aspect – as well as the true auxiliary haber “have” (see Burzio, 1986; Cardinaletti & Shlonsky, 2004; Cinque, 2004, 2006; Perlmutter, 1983; Strozer, 1976; among many others). What is especially noteworthy about these constructions is that, when pronominal clitics are used, these may be associated either with the main finite verb or the lexical verb in a non-finite form.

Type
Chapter
Information
Exploring Interfaces , pp. 209 - 299
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

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

Authier, M. & Reed, L. (2009). On the Lack of Transparency Effects in French. In Masullo, P., O´Rourke, E., & Huang, C.-H., eds., Romance Linguistics 2007. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 3749.Google Scholar
Baker, M. (1988). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. (1996). The Polysynthesis Parameter. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertora, H. (2016). Ascenso de clíticos y Long-Distance Agreement como variantes del mismo fenómeno. In Pelliza, M., Picallo, X., & Sayago, S., eds., Literatura-Lingüística: Investigaciones en la Patagonia IX. Comodoro Rivadavia: Editorial Universitaria de la Patagonia, pp. 50–7.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. & Phillips, Colin (1993) Papers on Case and Agreement I, MIT Working Papers in Liguistics, 18.Google Scholar
Burzio, L. (1986). Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. & Shlonsky, U. (2004). Clitic Positions and Restructuring in Italian. Linguistic Inquiry, 35, 519–57.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.(2000). Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. In Martin, R., Michaels, D., & Uriagereka, J., eds., Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press, pp. 89156.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. (2004). Restructuring and Functional Structure. in Belletti, A., ed., Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. III. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 132–91.Google Scholar
Cinque, G.(2006). Restructuring and Functional Heads: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. IV. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Contreras, H. & Masullo, P. (1999). Hacia un algoritmo para la fusión sintáctica. Boletín de Filología, 37, 417–30.Google Scholar
Contreras, H. & Masullo, P.(2002). Motivating Merge. In Leonetti, M., Fernández-Soriano, O., & Escandell Vidal, V., eds., Current Issues in Generative Grammar: 10th Colloquium on Generative Grammar, 2000, Selected Papers. Universidad de Alcalá de Henares.Google Scholar
Guasti, M. T. (1997). Romance Causatives. In Haegeman, L., ed., The New Comparative Syntax. London: Longman, pp. 124–44.Google Scholar
Halpern, A. L. (1998). Clitics. In Spencer, A. & Zwicky, A., eds., The Handbook of Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hurtado, A. (1984). On the Properties of LF. Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics, 5, 121–49.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. (1986). Three Issues in the Theory of Clitics: Case, Doubled NPs, and Extraction in the Syntax of Pronominal Clitics. In Borer, H., ed., The Syntax of Pronominal Clitics, Syntax and Semantics, 19. Orlando: Academic Press, pp. 1542.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. (1975). French Syntax: The Transformational Cycle. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kayne, R.(1989). Null Subjects and Clitic Climbing. In Jaeggli, O. & Safir, K., eds., The Null Subject Parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Kayne, R.(1991). Romance Clitics, Verb Movement, and PRO, Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 647–86.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. (1994). Latin American Spanish. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Masullo, P. (1990). Toward an Incorporation Account of Argument Alternations in Spanish (unpublished Master’s thesis). Seattle: University of Washington.Google Scholar
Masullo, P.(1992a). Relativized Minimality and Logical Form. In Varden, K., ed., University of Washington Working Papers in Linguistics. University of Washington.Google Scholar
Masullo, P.(1992b). Incorporation and Case Theory in Spanish: A Crosslinguistic Perspective (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Seattle: University of Washington.Google Scholar
Masullo, P.(1998). Complex Predicates: A Direct Merge Analysis. Paper presented at the Australian Linguistics Society Meeting, University of Queensland, Brisbane, July 1998.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. (1983). Studies in Relational Grammar, vol. I. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, C. (1993) Papers on Case and Agreement II, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 19.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Saltarelli, M. (1989). Syntactic Shift and the Creation of Clitics in Romance. In De Cesaris, J. & Kirschner, C., eds., Studies in Romance Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 347–64.Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. (1997). Subject Clitics in French and Romance, Complex Inversion and Clitic Doubling. In Johnson, K. & Roberts, I., eds., Studies in Comparative Syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Strozer, J. (1976). Clitics in Spanish (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California–Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Suñer, M. (1988). The Role of Agreement in Clitic-Doubled Constructions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 6, 391434.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J. (1995). Aspects of the Syntax of Clitic Placement in Western Romance, Linguistic Inquiry, 26, 79123.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. (1987). Levels of Representation in the Lexicon and in the Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

References

Abney, S. (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
Baker, M. (1985). The Mirror Principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry, 16, 373415.Google Scholar
Baker, M.(1996). The Polysynthesis Parameter. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bartsch, R. & Vennemann, T. (1972). The Grammar of relative adjectives and comparison. Linguistische Berichte, 20, 1932.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1967). Adjectives in English: attribution and predication. Lingua, 18, 134.Google Scholar
Borer, H. (2005). In name only. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bosque, I. & Picallo, C. (1996). Postnominal adjectives in Spanish DPs. Journal of Linguistics, 32(2), 349–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botha, R. (1983). Morphological mechanisms. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. (1994). On the evidence for partial N movement in the Romance DP. In Cinque, G., Koster, J., Pollock, J.-Y., Rizzi, L., & Zanuttini, R., eds., Paths towards Universal Grammar: essays in honor of Richard Kayne. Georgetown University Press, pp. 85110.Google Scholar
Cinque, G.(2010). The syntax of adjectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cresswell, M. (1977). The semantics of degree. In Partee, B., ed., Montague Grammar. New York: Academic Press, pp. 261–92.Google Scholar
Diesing, M. (1992). Bare plural subjects and the derivation of logical representations. Linguistic Inquiry, 23(3), 353–80.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. (2000). Locality and extended projection. In Coopmans, P., Everaert, M., & Grimshaw, J., eds., Lexical specification and lexical insertion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 115–33.Google Scholar
Gulli, N. (2003). Reduplication in syntax (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Graduate Center, City University of New York.Google Scholar
Halle, M. (2008). Reduplication. In Freidin, R., Otero, C, & Zubizarreta, M. L., eds., Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 325–58.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, J. (1985). On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry, 16, 547–94.Google Scholar
Kennedy, C. (1999). Projecting the adjective: the syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, C.(2007). Vagueness and grammar: the semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 145.Google Scholar
Kennedy, C. & McNally, L. (2005). Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language, 81, 345–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, C. & McNally, L.(2010). Color, context and compositionality. Synthese, 174(1), 7998.Google Scholar
Klein, E. (1980). A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 145.Google Scholar
Landau, I. (2004). The scale of finiteness and the calculus of control. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 22(4), 811–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laenzlinger, C. (2005). French adjective ordering: perspectives on DP-internal movement types. Lingua, 115, 645–89.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. & Uriagereka, J. (with Cedric Boeckx). (2005). A course in minimalist syntax: foundations and prospects. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Li, Y. A. (1998). Argument determiner phrases and number phrases. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 693702.Google Scholar
Liao, W. W. R. (2011). The symmetry of syntactic relations (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California–Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Liao, W. W. R. & Vergnaud, J. R. (2010). Phases and DPs. Paper presented at Glow in Asia, 8. Beijing Language and Cultural University, 12–14 Aug.Google Scholar
Liao, W. W. R. & Vergnaud, J. R.(2014). On Merge-markers and nominal structures. In McKinney-Bock, K. & Zubizarreta, M. L., eds., Primitive elements of grammatical theory: papers by Jean-Roger Vergnaud and his collaborators. New York: Routledge, pp. 237–74.Google Scholar
Marantz, A. (2001). Words. Ms., Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K. (2009). Adjective ordering restrictions: exploring relevant semantic notions for syntactic ordering. In Hogue, Alan & Schertz, Jessamyn, eds., Proceedings of Arizona Linguistics Circle 3. University of Arizona: Linguistics Department, pp. 116.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K.(2013a). Building phrase structure from Items and Contexts (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Los Angeles: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K.(2013b). An argument for interval semantics of gradable adjectives. In Keine, S. & Sloggett, S., eds., Proceedings of NELS 42, vol. II. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, www.createspace.com/4280290.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K. & Pancheva, R. in press. Why is Attributive heavy Distributive? Ms. Oregon Health and Science University and University of Southern California.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K. & Vergnaud, J. R. (2010). Grafts and beyond. Paper presented at Generative Linguistics in the Old World (GLOW), 33. University of Wroclaw, Poland, 14–16 April.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K. & Vergnaud, J. R.(2014). Grafts and beyond: Graph Theoretic Syntax. In McKinney-Bock, K. & Zubizarreta, M. L., eds., Primitive elements of grammatical theory: papers by Jean-Roger Vergnaud and his collaborators. New York: Routledge, pp. 207–36.Google Scholar
McKinney-Bock, K. & Zubizarreta, M. L. (2014). Introduction. In McKinney-Bock, K. & Zubizarreta, M. L., eds., Primitive elements of grammatical theory: papers by Jean-Roger Vergnaud and his collaborators. New York: Routledge, pp. 130.Google Scholar
Rooth, M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75116.Google Scholar
Scott, G. J. (2002). Stacked adjectival modification and the structure of Nominal Phrases. In Cinque, G., ed., Functional structure in DP and IP: the cartography of syntactic structures. Oxford University Press, pp. 91116.Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. (2005). Division of labor between Merge and Move: strict locality of selection and apparent reconstruction paradoxes. LingBuzz 000163. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/000163.Google Scholar
Svenonius, P. (2008). The position of adjectives and other phrasal modifiers in the decomposition of DP. In McNally, L. & Kennedy, C., eds., Adjectives and adverbs: syntax, semantics, and discourse. Oxford University Press, pp. 1642.Google Scholar
Toledo, A. & Sassoon, G. (2011). Absolute vs. relative adjectives: variance within vs. between individuals. Proceedings of SALT, 21, 135–54. Retrieved from https://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/SALT/issue/view/88.Google Scholar
Truswell, R. (2009). Attributive adjectives and nominal templates. Linguistic Inquiry, 40(3), 525–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Rooij, R. (2011). Vagueness and linguistics. In Ronzitti, G., ed., Vagueness: a guide. New York: Springer, pp. 123–70.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J. R. (2009). A note on Q, relators and syntax. Ms., University of Southern California–Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J. R.(2014a). Some explanatory avatars of conceptual necessity: elements of UG. In McKinney-Bock, K. & Zubizarreta, M. L., eds., Primitive elements of grammatical theory: papers by Jean-Roger Vergnaud and his collaborators. New York: Routledge, pp. 123206.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J. R.(2014b). On a certain notion of occurrence: the source of metrical structure and much more. In McKinney-Bock, K. & Zubizarreta, M. L., eds., Primitive elements of grammatical theory: papers by Jean-Roger Vergnaud and his collaborators. New York: Routledge, pp. 6191.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J. R. & Zubizarreta, M. L. (2001). Derivation and constituent structure. Ms., University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J. R. & Zubizarreta, M. L.(2005). The representation of Focus and its implications: towards an alternative account of some intervention effects. In Corver, H. N., Huybregts, R., Kleinhenz, U., & Koster, J., eds., Organizing grammar: linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 641–60.Google Scholar
von Stechow, A. (1984). Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics, 3, 177.Google Scholar
Zamparelli, R. (2000). Layers in the Determiner Phrase. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. (2001). Intervention effects in the French wh-in-situ construction: syntax or interpretation? LSRL XXXI / University of Illinois at Chicago / April 19–22, 2001. In Nuñez-Cedeño, R., López, L., & Cameron, R., eds., A Romance perspective in language knowledge and use: selected papers from the 31st Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 359–80.Google Scholar

References

Alexiadou, A. & Anagnostopoulou, E. (1998). Parametrizing AGR: word order, V-movement, and EPP-checking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 16(3), 491539.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C. (2008). The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, A. (2001). Inversion as focalization. In Hulk, A. & Pollock, J.-Y., eds., Subject inversion in Romance and the theory of Universal Grammar. Oxford University Press, pp. 6090.Google Scholar
Belletti, A.(2005). Extended doubling and the VP periphery. Probus: International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics, 17(1), 135.Google Scholar
Contreras, H. (1976). A theory of word order with special reference to Spanish. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Di Tullio, A., Saab, A., & Zdrojewski, P. (2018). Clitic doubling in a doubling world: the case of Argentinean Spanish reconsidered. In Gallego, A., ed., The syntactic variation of Spanish dialects. Oxford University Press, pp. 215–44.Google Scholar
Estigarribia, B. (2005). Direct Object clitic doubling in OT-LFG: a new look at Rioplatense Spanish. In Butt, M. and Holloway King, T., eds., Proceedings of the LFG05 conference. University of Bergen/Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp 116–35.Google Scholar
Estigarribia, B.(2006). Why Clitic Doubling? A functional analysis for Rioplatense Spanish. In Timothy, D., Face, L., & Klee, C. A., eds., Selected proceedings of the 8th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 123–36.Google Scholar
Feldhausen, I. & Vanrell, M. (2014). Prosody, focus, and word order in Catalan and Spanish – an optimality theoretic approach. Proceedings of the 10th International Seminar on Speech Production (ISSP), 5–8 May 2014, University of Cologne.Google Scholar
Franco, J. & Mejías-Bikandi, E. (1997). Overt and covert raising to Spec AGR. Linguistic Analysis, 27, 79107.Google Scholar
Gabriel, C. (2010). On focus, prosody, and word order in Argentinean Spanish. a minimalist OT account. Revista Virtual de Estudos da Linguagem, Special Issue 4 “Optimality-theoretic Syntax,” 183222.Google Scholar
Gallego, A. (2013). Object Shift in Romance. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 31(2), 409–51.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Bravo, R. (2007). Prominence scales and unmarked word order in Spanish. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 25(2), 235–71.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. (1982). Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Kiss, K. É. (1998). Identificational focus versus information focus. Language, 74(2), 245–73.Google Scholar
López, L. (2009). A derivational syntax for information structure. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, E. & Sanchez, L. (2016). Object agreement marking and information structure in monolingual and bilingual Andean Spanish. Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 29(2), 544–81.Google Scholar
Mayer, E. & Sanchez, L(2017). Feature variability in the bilingual–monolingual continuum: clitics in bilingual Quechua–Spanish, bilingual Shipibo–Spanish and in monolingual Limeño Spanish contact varieties. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–14. DOI:10.1080/13670050.2017.1322037.Google Scholar
Mayer, E. & Sanchez, L(2018). Typological differences in morphological patterns, gender features, and thematic structure in the L2 acquisition of Ashaninka Spanish. Languages, 3(2), 21, https://doi.org/10.3390/languages3020021.Google Scholar
Nava, E. & Zubizarreta, M. L. (2010). Deconstructing the nuclear stress algorithm: evidence from second language speech. In Erteschik-Shir, N. & Rochman, L., eds., The sound patterns of syntax. Oxford University Press, pp. 291316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ocampo, F. (1995). The word order of constructions with a verb, a subject, and a direct object in spoken Spanish. In Amastae, J., Goodall, G., Montalbetti, M., & Phinney, M., eds., Contemporary research in Romance linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 291306.Google Scholar
Ordóñez, F. (1997). Word order and clause structure in Spanish and other Romance languages (unpublished doctoral dissertation). The City University of New York.Google Scholar
Ordóñez, F.(1998). Post-verbal asymmetries in Spanish. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 16(2), 313–46.Google Scholar
Ordóñez, F.(2007). Cartography of postverbal subjects in Spanish and Catalan. In Baauw, S., Drijkoningen, F. A. C., & Pinto, M., eds., Romance languages and linguistic theory 2005: selected papers from “Going Romance.” Utrecht. 8–10 December 2005. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 259–80.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (2006). Interface strategies: optimal and costly computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sánchez, L. (2006). Clitic-doubling and the checking of focus. Ms., Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Sánchez, L.(2010). La aparente opcionalidad del doblado de clíticos en el español limeño. Cuadernos de la ALFAL, 1, 94105.Google Scholar
Sánchez, L. & Zdrojewski, P. (2013). Restricciones semánticas y pragmáticas al doblado de clíticos en el español de Buenos Aires y de Lima: la variación en la gramática del español actual. Special volume of Lingüística, 29(2), 271320.Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. (1996). Clitic constructions. In Rooryck, J. & Zaring, L., eds., Phrase structure and the lexicon. Kluwer: Dordrecht, pp. 213–76.Google Scholar
Suñer, M. (2000). Object Shift: comparing a Romance language to Germanic. Probus: International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics, 12, 261–89.Google Scholar
Torrego, E. (1998). The dependencies of objects. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vanrell, M. M. & Fernández-Soriano, O. (2013). Variation at the interfaces in Ibero-Romance: Catalan and Spanish prosody and word order. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 12, 253–82.Google Scholar
Vanrell, M. M. & Fernández-Soriano, O.(2018). Language variation at the prosody-syntax interface: focus in European Spanish. In García, M. and Uths, M., eds., Focus realization and interpretation in Romance and beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 3370.Google Scholar
Villalba, X. (2000). The syntax of sentence periphery (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Zagona, K. (2000). The syntax of Spanish. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zdrojewski, P. (2008). ¿Por quién doblan los clíticos? Restricciones morfosintácticas sobre la duplicación pronominal en el español rioplatense (unpublished Master’s thesis). Neuquén: Universidad Nacional del Comahue.Google Scholar
Zdrojewski, P. & Sánchez, L. (2014). Variation in accusative clitic doubling across three Spanish dialects. Lingua, 151, 162–76.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. (1994). The grammatical representation of topic and focus: implications for the structure of the clause. Working Papers in Linguistics, 4(1), 97.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L.(1998). Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L.(1999). Las funciones informativas: tema y foco. In Bosque, I. & Demonte, V., eds., Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Española, vol. III: Entre la oración y el discurso: morfología. Madrid: Espasa, pp. 4215–44.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L.(2016). Nuclear stress and information structure. In Féry, C. & Ishihara, S., eds., The Oxford handbook of information structure. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save 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 saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save 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 saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×