Bibliography

Olga Kagan

doi:10.1017/CBO9781316136195.013

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 November 2015

Olga Kagan

Show author details

Olga Kagan: Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A summary 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: Chapter
Information: Scalarity in the Verbal Domain
The Case of Verbal Prefixation in Russian
, pp. 256 - 262

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316136195.013 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2015

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

Aissen, J. (2003). “Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 435–483.Google Scholar

Andreevskaya, A. (1997). “Pristavka i ejo kontekst.” In Krongauz, M. A. and Paillard, D. (eds.), Glagol’naja prefixacija v russkom jazyke: sbornik statej. Moscow: Russkije slovari, pp. 113–120.Google Scholar

Babko-Malaya, O. (1999). “Zero morphology: A study of aspect, argument structure and case.” Doctoral dissertation. The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, USA.Google Scholar

Babyonyshev, M. and Brun, D. (2002). “Specificity matters: A new look at the new genitive of negation.” In Toman, J. (ed.), Proceedings of Tenth Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Second Ann Arbor Meeting. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar

Bailyn, J. F. (1997). “Genitive of negation is obligatory.” In Browne, W., Dornisch, E., Kondrashova, N. and Zec, D. (eds.), Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Cornell Meeting. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar

Batiukova, O. (in press). “Event structure and lexical semantics in a scalar approach to actionality.” In J. L. Cifuentes, S. Rodríguez Rosique and E. Barrajón López (eds.), Verb Classes and Aspect. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Beavers, J. (2007). “Scalar complexity and the structure of events.” In Dölling, J and Heyde-Zybatow, T (eds.), Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation,. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Borik, O. (2002). “Aspect and reference time.” Ph.D. thesis.University of Utrecht.Google Scholar

Borschev, V., Paducheva, E. V., Partee, B. H., Testelets, Y. G. and Yanovich, I.. (2008). “Russian Genitives, Non-Referentiality, and the Property-Type Hypothesis.” In Antonenko, A, J. F. Bailyn and C. Y. Bethin (eds.), Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Stony Brook Meeting. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 48–67.Google Scholar

Braginsky, P. (2008). The Semantics of the Prefix ZA- in Russian. Doctoral dissertation. Bar-Ilan University.Google Scholar

Caudal, P. and Nicolas, D.. (2005). “Types of degrees and types of event structures.” In Maienborn, C. and Wöllstein, A. (eds.), Event Arguments: Foundations and Applications. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 277–300.Google Scholar

Comrie, B. and Corbett, G. G.. (2002). The Slavonic Languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Cubberley, P. (1994). Handbook of Russian Affixes. Columbus, OH: Slavica.Google Scholar

Dayal, V. (2003). “A Semantics for pseudo incorporation.” Ms. Rutgers University, New Jersey, USA.Google Scholar

Depraetere, I. (1995). “On the necessity of distinguishing between (un)boundedness and (a)telicity.” Linguistics and Philosophy 18: 1–19.Google Scholar

Dobrovie-Sorin, C., Bleam, T. and Espinal, M. T.. (2006). “Bare nouns, number and types of incorporation.” In Vogeleer, S and Tasmowski, L (eds.), Non-definiteness and Plurality, pp. 51–79.Google Scholar

Dobrušina, E. R. (1997). “V poiskax invariantnovo značenija pristavki iz-.” In Krongauz, M. A. and Paillard, D. (eds.), Glagol’naja prefixacija v russkom jazyke: sbornik statej. Moscow: Russkije slovari, pp. 121–140.Google Scholar

Dowty, D. (1979). Word Meaning and Montague Grammar: The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar

Dowty, D. (1989). “On the semantic content of the notion ‘thematic role’.” In Chierchia, G., Partee, B. and Turner, R. (eds.), Property Theory, Type Theory and Natural Language Semantics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar

Espinal, M. T. and McNally, L.. (2011). “Bare nominals and incorporating verbs in Spanish and Catalan.” Journal of Linguistics 47(1): 87–128.Google Scholar

Farkas, D. and de Swart, H.. (2003). The Semantics of Incorporation. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Filip, H. (1999). Aspect, Eventuality Types and Nominal Reference. New York and London: Garland.Google Scholar

Filip, H. (2000). “The quantization puzzle.” In Tenny, C. and Pustejovsky, J. (eds.), Events as Grammatical Objects. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Filip, H. (2003). “Prefixes and the delimitation of events.” Journal of Slavic Linguistics 11(1): 55–101.Google Scholar

Filip, H. (2005). Measures and indefinites. In Carlson, Gregory N. and Pelletier, Francis Jeffry (eds.), References and Quantification: The Partee Effect. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 229–288.Google Scholar

Filip, H. (2008). “Events and maximalization.” In Rothstein, Susan (ed.), Theoretical and Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 217–256.Google Scholar

Filip, H. and Rothstein, S.. (2006). “Telicity as a semantic parameter.” In Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL 14). The Princeton University Meeting, ed. James Lavine, Steven Franks, Hana Filip and Mila Tasseva-Kurktchieva. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 139–156.Google Scholar

Forsyth, J. (1970). A Grammar of Aspect. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Franks, S. (1995). Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

van Geenhoven, V. (1998). Semantic Incorporation and Indefinite Descriptions: Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Noun Incorporation in West Greenlandic. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Y. (2009). “Additivity in the domain of eventualities.” Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Logic and Language. Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Y. (2010). “Additivity in the domain of eventualities.” In Prinzhorn, Martin, Schmitt, Viola and Zobel, Sarah (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 14, Vienna, pp. 151–167.Google Scholar

Gribanova, V. (in press). “Verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis and the structure of the Russian verbal complex.” To appear in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.Google Scholar

Grimm, S. M. (2005). “The lattice of case and agentivity.” M.Sc. thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Gvozdev, A. (1955). Očerki po stilistike russkogo jazyka. [Remarks on the stylistics of Russian]. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoje učebno-pedagogičeskoje izdatel’stvo.Google Scholar

Hale, K. L. and Keyser, S. J.. (1987). A View from the Middle. Lexicon Project Working Papers 10. Center for Cognitive Science, MIT, USA.Google Scholar

Hardegree, H. (2001). Notes on Philosophy of Science. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar

Hay, J., Kennedy, C., and Levin, B.. (1999). “Scale structure underlies telicity in ‘degree achievements’.” In Matthews, T and Strolovitch, D (eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory 9. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, pp. 127–144.Google Scholar

Heim, I. (1982). “The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases.” Dissertation. University of Massachussetts, Amherst.Google Scholar

Heim, I. (2000). “Degree operators and scope.” In Proceedings of SALT 10, Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, pp. 40–64.Google Scholar

Isačenko, A. V. (1960/2003). Grammatičeskij stroj russkogo jazyka v sopostavlenii s slovackim. Moscow and Vienna: Jazyki slavjanskoj kultury.Google Scholar

Istratkova, V. (2004). “On multiple prefixation in Bulgarian.” In Svenonius, Peter (ed.), Nordlyd 32.2, special issue on Slavic prefixes Tromsø: CASTL, pp. 301–321.Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1957/1971). “Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb.” In Selected Writings II. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 130–147.Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1984). Russian and Slavic Grammar: Studies 1931–1981. Ed. Waugh, Linda R. and Halle, Morris. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar

Janda, L. A. (1985). “The meaning of Russian verbal prefixes: Semantics and grammar.” In Flier, M. S. and Timberlake, A. (eds.), The Scope of Slavic Aspect. UCLA Slavic Studies, vol. XII. Columbus, OH: Slavica, pp. 26–40.Google Scholar

Janda, L. A. (1986). A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes ZA-, PERE-, OT- and DO-. Munich, Germany.Google Scholar

Janda, L. A. (1988). “The mapping of elements of cognitive space onto grammatical relations: An example from Russian verbal prefixation.” In Rudzka-Ostyn, B (ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 327–343.Google Scholar

Janda, L. A. and Nesset, T.. (2010). “Taking apart Russian RAZ-.” Slavic and East European Journal 54(3): 476–501.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2005). “Genitive case: A modal account.” In Proceedings of Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics 21 (IATL 21).Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2007a). “On the semantics of structural case.” Doctoral dissertation, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2007b). “On the semantics of verbs of motion in Russian.” In Y. Falk (ed.), Proceedings of Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics 23 (IATL 23).Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2010a). “Aspects of motion: On the semantics and pragmatics of indeterminate aspect.” In Perelmutter, R and Driagina, V (eds.), New Approaches to Slavic Verbs of Motion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 141–162.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2010b). “Genitive objects, existence and individuation.” Russian Linguistics 34(1): 17–39. DOI 10.1007/s11185-009-9051-x.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2010c). “Russian aspect as number in the verbal domain.” In Laca, B and Hofherr, P (eds.), Layers of AspectStanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 91–112.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2011). “The Scale Hypothesis and the prefixes pere- and nedo-.” Scando-Slavica 57(2): 160–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00806765.2011.631777 Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2012). “Degree semantics for Russian verbal prefixes: The case of pod- and do-.” In Gronn, A. and Pazel, A.’ skaya (eds.), The Russian Verb. Oslo Studies in Language 4.1. www.journals.uio.no/osla.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (2013). “Scalarity in the domain of verbal prefixes.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31(2): 483–526. DOI: 10.1007/s11049-013-9190-z.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. (forthcoming). “On the scalar nature of verbal prefixes in Slavic.” In J. Fleischhauer et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop “Scalarity in Verb-Based Constructions.”Google Scholar

Kagan, O. and Pereltsvaig, A.. (2011a). “Syntax and semantics of bare NPs: Objects of intensive reflexive verbs in Russian.” In Bonami, O, and Hofherr, P. Cabredo (eds.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 8, pp. 221–238.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. and Pereltsvaig, A.. (2011b). “Bare NPs and Semantic Incorporation: Objects of intensive reflexives at the syntax-semantics interface.” In Browne, W, Cooper, A, Fisher, A, Kesici, E, Predolac, N and Zec, D (eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 18: The Cornell Meeting. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 226–240.Google Scholar

Kagan, O. and Alexeyenko, S.. (2011). “Degree modification in Russian morphology: The case of the suffix –ovat.” In Y. N. Falk (ed.), Proceedings of IATL 26.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (1999). Projecting the Adjective: The Syntax and Semantics of Gradability and Comparison. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (2001). “Polar opposition and the ontology of ‘degrees’.” Linguistics and Philosophy 24: 33–70.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (2007). “Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable predicates.” Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 1–45.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (2012). “The composition of incremental change.” In V. Demonte and L. McNally (eds.), Telicity, Change, State: A Cross-categorical View of Event Structure. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. and Levin, B.. (2002). “Telicity corresponds to degree of change.” Unpublished ms., Northwestern University and Stanford University. Also: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/linguistics-and-philosophy/24-979-topics-in-semantics-fall-2002/lecture-notes/24_979_12_2.pdf Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. and Levin, B.. (2008). “Measure of change: The adjectival core of degree achievements.” In McNally, L. and Kennedy, C. (eds.), Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics and Discourse. Oxford University Press, pp. 156–182.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. and McNally, L.. (2005). “Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates.” Language 81(2): 345–381.Google Scholar

Klein, E. (1980). “A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives.” Linguistics and Philosophy 4: 1–45.Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (1994). “The event argument and the semantics of voice.” Ms. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (1992). “Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution.” In I. A. Sag and A. Szabolsci (eds.), Lexical Matters. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information, pp. 29–53.Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (1998). “The origins of telicity.” In Rothstein, S. (ed.), Events and Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 197–235.Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (2007). “Approximate interpretation of number words: A case for strategic communication.” In Bouma, G., Krämer, I. and Zwarts, J. (eds.), Cognitive Foundations of Communication Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschapen, pp. 111–126.Google Scholar

Krongauz, M. A. (1997). “Opyt slovarnogo opisanija pristavki ot-.” In Krongauz, M. A. and Paillard, D. (eds.), Glagol’naja prefixacija v russkom jazyke: sbornik statej. Moscow: Russkije slovari, pp. 62–86.Google Scholar

Krongauz, M. A. and Paillard, D.. (1997). Glagol’naja prefixacija v russkom jazyke: sbornik statej. Moscow: Russkije slovari.Google Scholar

Landman, F. (2008). “1066. On the differences between the tense-perspective-aspect systems of English and Dutch.” In Rothstein, S. (ed.), Theoretical and Cross-linguistic Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Landman, F. and Rothstein, S.. (2008). “Incremental homogeneity in the semantics of aspectual for-phrases.” In Hovav, M., Doron, E. and Sichel, I (eds.), Syntax, Lexical Semantics and Event Structure. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Levin, B. (1993). English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Levin, B. and Hovav, M. Rappaport. (1995). Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 26, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (2001). “Space: Linguistic expression.” In Smelser, N. J and Baltes, P. (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. XXII. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 14749–14752.Google Scholar

Maslov, J. S. (1948). “Vid i leksičeskoe značenie glagola v sovremennom russkom literaturnow yazyke” (“Aspect and the lexical meaning of the verb in contemporary Standard Russian”). Izvestija Akademii nauk SSSR, otdelenie literatury i jazyka 7(4): 304–316.Google Scholar

McNally, L. (2011). “The relative role of property type and scale structure in explaining the behavior of gradable adjectives.” In Nouwen, R., van Rooij, R., Sauerland, U. and Schmitz, H. C. (eds.), Vagueness in Communication: Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Folli. Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 151–168.Google Scholar

Nakanishi, K. (2004). “On comparative quantification in the verbal domain.” In Proceedings of SALT 14. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, pp. 179–196.Google Scholar

Neidle, C. (1988). The Role of Case in Russian Syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar

Padučeva, E. V. (1992). “O semantičiskeskom podxode k sintaksisu i genitivnom subjekte glagola byt’.” [On the semantic approach to syntax and the genitive subject of the verb byt’]. Russian Linguistics 16: 53–63.Google Scholar

Padučeva, E. V. (1996). Semantičeskie Issledovania. Moscow: Jazyki Russkoj Kul’tury.Google Scholar

Padučeva, E. V. (1997). “Roditel’nyj subjecta v otricatel’nom predloženii: sinaksis ili semantika?” [Genitive of subject in a negative sentence: Syntax or semantics?]. Voprosy jazykoznania 2: 101–116.Google Scholar

Paillard, D. (1991). “Aspect et lexique: Préverbes et perfectivation en russe. Le préverbe ZA-.” Bulletin de la linguistique générale et appliquée (BULAG) 17.37–49. University of Besançon.Google Scholar

Paillard, D. (1997). “Formal’noe predstavlenie pristavki ot-.” In Krongauz, M. A. and Paillard, D. (eds.), Glagol’naja prefixacija v russkom jazyke: sbornik statej. Moscow: Russkije slovari, pp. 87–112.Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. (1986). “Noun phrase interpretation and type shifting principles.” In Groenendijk, J., de Jongh, D. and Stokhof, M. (eds.), Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalised Quantifiers. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Partee, B. (2000). “Some remarks on linguistic uses of the notion of ‘event’.” In Tenny, C. and Pustejovsky, J. (eds.), Events as Grammatical Objects. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. and Borschev, V. (2004). “The semantics of Russian genitive of negation: The nature and role of perspectival structure.” Paper presented at SALT (Semantics and Linguistic Theory) 14.Google Scholar

Pazelskaya, A. G. and Tatevosov, S. G.. (2006). “Uninflected VPs, deverbal nouns and the aspectual architecture of Russian.” In Lavine, J. E, Franks, S., Tasseva-Kurktchieva, M. and Filip, H. (eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 14. The Princeton Meeting, Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 258–276.Google Scholar

Pereltsvaig, A. (1999). “The genitive of negation and aspect in Russian.” In Rose, Y. and Steele, J. (eds.), McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 14: 111–140.Google Scholar

Pesetsky, D. M. (1982). “Paths and categories.” Ph.D. dissertation. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar

Piñón, C. (2008). “Aspectual composition with degrees.” In McNally, L and Kennedy, C (eds.), Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics, and Discourse, Oxford University Press, 183–219.Google Scholar

Plungyan, V. A. (2001). “Pristavka pod- v russkom jazyke: K opisaniju semantičeskoj seti.” Moskovskij lingvističeskij žurnal 5: 95–124.Google Scholar

Ramchand, G. (2004). “Time and the event: The semantics of Russian prefixes.” In Svenonius, P (ed.), Nordlyd 32.2. Special issue on Slavic prefixes. Tromsø: CASTL, pp. 323–361.Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. (2008). “Lexicalized meaning and the internal structure of events.” In Rothstein, S. (ed.), Theoretical and Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 13–42.Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. (2011). “Lexicalized scales and scalar change in two domains.” Paper presented at the workshop “Scalarity in Verb-Based Constructions.” Dusseldorf, April 2011.Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. (2014). “Building scalar changes.” In Alexiadou, A., Borer, H. and Schäfer, F. (eds.), Roots. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. and Levin, B.. (1998). “Building verb meanings.” In Butt, M. and Geuder, W. (eds.), The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 97–134.Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. and Levin, B.. (2010). “Reflections on manner/result complementarity.” In Doron, E., Hovav, M. Rappaport and Sichel, I. (eds.), Syntax, Lexical Semantics, and Event Structure, Oxford University Press, pp. 21–38.Google Scholar

Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Romanova, E. (2004). “Superlexical vs. lexical prefixes.” In Svenonius, Peter (ed.), Nordlyd 32.2, special issue on Slavic prefixes. Tromsø: CASTL, pp. 255–278.Google Scholar

Romanova, E. (2006). “Constructing perfectivity in Russian.” Ph.D. thesis, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar

Rosental, D. (1997). Spravočnik po pravopisaniju i stilistike. Moscow: Komplect.Google Scholar

Rothstein, S. (2004). Structuring Events. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Rothstein, S. (2008). “Two puzzles for a theory of lexical aspect: The case of semelfactives and degree adverbials.” In Dölling, J., Heyde-Zybatow, T. and Shaefer, M. (eds.), Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation. MoutonBerlin: De Gruyter, pp. 175–198.Google Scholar

Rotstein, C. and Winter, Y.. 2004. “Total adjectives vs. partial adjectives: Scale structure and higher-order modifiers.” Natural Language Semantics 12: 259–288.Google Scholar

Sassoon, G. (2011). “From generalized quantifiers to the Adjective-Noun distinction – A new approach to adjectives.” Paper presented at the conference Roots III, Jerusalem, June 2011.Google Scholar

Sauerland, U. and Stateva, P.. (2007). “Scalar vs. epistemic vagueness: Evidence from approximators.” In Gibson, M. and Friedman, T. (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 17. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar

van Schooneveld, C. H. 1978. Semantic Transmutations: Prolegomena to a Calculus of Meaning, vol. I: The Cardinal Semantic Structure of Prepositions, Cases, and Paratactic Conjunctions in Contemporary Standard Russian. Bloomington, IN: Physsardt.Google Scholar

Sherkina-Lieber, M. and Armoškaite, S.. (2008). “Verbal suffixes as quantization-changing devices in Russian.” In Antonenko, A J. F. Bailyn and C. Y. Bethin (eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Stony Brook Meeting 2007 (FASL 16)Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar

Shvedova, N. J. et al. (1982). Russkaja Grammatika, vol. I. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

Smith, C. (1991). The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar

Součková, K. (2004a). “Measure prefixes in Czech: Cumulative na- and delimitative po-.” Unpublished MA thesis, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar

Součková, K. Součková, K. (2004b). “There’s only one po-.” In Svenonius, P (ed.), Nordlyd 32.2. Special issue on Slavic prefixes. Tromsø: CASTL, pp. 403–419.Google Scholar

Stevens, S. S. (1946). “On the theory of scales of measurement.” Science, New Series 103:677–680.Google Scholar

Svenonius, P. (2004). “Slavic prefixes inside and outside VP.” In Svenonius, P (ed.), Nordlyd 32.2. Special issue on Slavic prefixes, pp. 205–253.Google Scholar

Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Tatevosov, S. (2007). “Measuring individuals, partitioning events: Semantics of cumulative verbs in Russian.” In Kosta, P and Schurcks, L (eds.), Linguistic Investigations into Formal Description of Slavic Languages. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 529–544.Google Scholar

Tatevosov, S. (2008). “Intermediate prefixes in Russian.” In Antonenko, A, J. F. Bailyn and C. Y. Bethin (eds.), Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Stony Brook Meeting. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 423–445.Google Scholar

Tenny, C. (1994). Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Thomas, G. (2009). “Incremental comparison.” Paper presented at the Syntax and Semantics Conference in Paris 2009, Paris.Google Scholar

Timberlake, A. 2004. A Reference Grammar of Russian. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Vekshin, N. L. (2003). Grammatika russkogo jazyka. AST-press škola.Google Scholar

Verkuyl, H. J. (1972). On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar

Vey, M. (1952). “Les préverbes ‘vides’ en tchéque moderne.” Revue des études slaves 29: 82–107.Google Scholar

Vinogradov, V. V. (1952). Grammatika russkogo jazyka. Moscow: Soviet Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar

Yadroff, M. and Fowler, J.. (1997). “Pristavka pro- i argumentnyj status imennyx grupp.” In Krongauz, M. A. and Paillard, D. (eds.), Glagol’naja prefiksacija v russkom jazyke: sbornik statej. Moscow: Russkije slovari, pp. 164–185.Google Scholar

Zaliznyak, A. A. and Shmelev, A. D. (2000). Vvedenie v russkuju aspektologiju. Moscow: Jazyki Russkoj Kul’tury.Google Scholar

Zwarts, J. and Winter, Y.. (2000). “Vector space semantics: A model-theoretic analysis of locative prepositions.” Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9: 169–211. DOI 10.1023/A:1008384416604.Google Scholar

Book contents

Bibliography

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive