Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 16 February 2020

(p. 1039) References

(p. 1039) References

Aarons, Debra (1996). Topic and topicalization in American Sign Language, Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 30: 65–106.Find this resource:

Abbott, Barbara (1976). Right node raising as a test for constituency, Linguistic Inquiry 7(4): 639–42.Find this resource:

Abdulkarim, Lamya and Tom Roeper (1997). Economy of representation: Ellipsis and NP reconstructions, in Antonella Sorace, Caroline Heycock, and Richard Shillcock (eds), Proceedings of GALA 97 Conference on Language Acquisition. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun (2014). Antecedent-contained deletion in Japanese: Support for the VP-ellipsis analysis. Ms. Tohoku Gakuin University.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun (2015). The in-situ approach to sluicing. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun (2016). Make short answers shorter: Support for the in-situ approach, Syntax 19(3): 223–55.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun and Norbert Hornstein (2012). ‘Lasnik-effects’ and string-vacuous ATB movement, in Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria and Vidal Valmala (eds), Ways of structure building. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 169–205.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun and Hiroto Hoshi (1997). Gapping and P-stranding, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 6: 101–36.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun and Chizuru Nakao (2012). String-vacuity under Japanese right node raising, in Matthew A. Tucker, Anie Thompson, Oliver Northrup, and Ryan Bennett (eds), Proceedings of FAJL 5. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 64. Cambridge, MA: MITPWL, 1–14.Find this resource:

Abe, Jun and Christopher Tancredi (2013). Non-constituent deaccenting and deletion: A phase-based approach. Ms. Tohoku Gakuin University and Keio University.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne (2005). Les syntagmes conjoints et leurs fonctions syntaxiques, Langages 160: 42–67.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne (2006a). In defense of lexical coordination, in Olivier Bonami and Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds), Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics. Paris: CNRS, 7–36.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne (2006b). Stripping constructions in French. Paper presented at the Coordination and Ellipsis Conference. Université Paris 7, 26 June.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne, Gabriela Bîlbîie, and François Mouret (2014). A Romance perspective on gapping constructions, in Hans Boas and Francisco Gonzálvez Garcia (eds), Romance perspectives on Construction Grammar. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 227–67.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne, Berthold Crysmann, and Aoi Shiraishi (2015). Syntactic mismatches in French peripheral ellipsis. Presentation at CSSP (Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris), Université Paris 7.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne and Danièle Godard (2000). Varieties of ‘esse’ in Romance languages, in Dan Flickinger and Andreas Kathol (eds), Proceedings of the 7th International HPSG Conference. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2–22.Find this resource:

Abeillé, Anne and Danièle Godard (2003). The syntactic flexibility of French degree adverbs, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International HPSG Conference. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 26–46.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus (2003). Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut at Storrs.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus (2004). Right Node Raising: Ellipsis or across the board movement? in Keir Moulton and Matthew Wolf (eds), NELS 34: Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association, 45–60.Find this resource:

(p. 1040) Abels, Klaus (2009). Don’t repair that island! It ain’t broke. Paper presented at the University of the Basque Country, Vitoria/Gasteiz.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus (2011). Don’t fix that island! It ain’t broke. Talk at the Islands in Contemporary Syntactic Theory workshop, University of the Basque Country.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus (2012). Phases: An essay on cyclicity in syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus (2016a). Displacement in syntax, in Mark Aronoff (ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.313.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus (2016b). On the interaction of P-stranding and sluicing in Bulgarian. Ms. UCL.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus and Veneeta Dayal (2016). On the syntax of multiple sluicing. Talk presented at the 47th annual meeting of North East Linguistic Society (NELS 47), UMass, Amherst, MA.Find this resource:

Abels, Klaus and Gary Thoms (2014). Resumption and island repair under sluicing. Talk presented at the LAGB (Linguistics Association of Great Britain) Annual Meeting, Oxford.Find this resource:

Abney, Steven (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Find this resource:

Abrusán, Márta (2014). Weak island semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Ackema, Peter and Kriszta Szendrői (2002). Determiner sharing as an instance of dependent ellipsis, Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 5(1): 3–34.Find this resource:

Adams, Perng Wang and Satoshi Tomioka (2012). Sluicing in Mandarin Chinese: An instance of pseudo-sluicing, in Jason Merchant and Andrew Simpson (eds), Sluicing: Cross-linguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 219–47.Find this resource:

Adliene, Egle (2014). Multiple sluicing in Lithuanian. Master’s thesis, UCL.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke (2007a). A movement account of Dutch gapping. Talk presented at Linguistics in the Netherlands Day, Utrecht University, 3 February.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke (2007b). A movement account of Dutch gapping. Ms. Catholic University of Brussels.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke (2009). You have the right to remain silent: The syntactic licensing of ellipsis. PhD thesis, Catholic University of Brussels.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke (2010). The syntactic licensing of ellipsis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke (2012). Modal complement ellipsis: VP ellipsis in Dutch?, in Peter Ackema, Rhona Alcorn, Caroline Heycock, Dany Jaspers, Jeroen van Craenenbroeck, and Guido Vanden Wyngaerd (eds), Comparative Germanic syntax: The state of the art. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1–34.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke (2016). Ellipsis, in Artemis Alexiadou and Tibor Kiss (eds), Syntax: Theory and analysis. An international handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 562–95.Find this resource:

Aelbrecht, Lobke and Will Harwood (2015). To be or not be elided: VP ellipsis revisited, Lingua 153: 66–97.Find this resource:

Agüero-Bautista, Calixto (2007). Diagnosing cyclicity in sluicing, Linguistic Inquiry 38: 413–44.Find this resource:

Ahmed-Chamanga, Mohamed (2010). Introduction à la grammaire structurale du comorien. Volume 1: Le shiNgazidja. Paris: KomEdit.Find this resource:

Akmajian, Adrian (1973). The role of focus in the interpretation of anaphoric expressions, in Stephen R. Anderson and Paul Kiparsky (eds), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt, 215–25.Find this resource:

Akmajian, Adrian (1984). Sentence types and the form–function fit. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2: 1–23.Find this resource:

Akmajian, Adrian, Susan Steele, and Thomas Wasow (1979). The category AUX in universal grammar, Linguistic Inquiry 10(1): 1–64.Find this resource:

Akmajian, Adrian and Thomas Wasow (1975). The constituent structure of VP and Aux and the position of the verb be, Linguistic Analysis 1: 205–45.Find this resource:

Ala-Sippola, Sanna (2012). Agentin ilmaiseminen suomalaisella viittomakielellä tuotetussa asiatekstissa [Expressing agent in a formal FinSL narrative]. MA thesis in General Linguistics, Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki.Find this resource:

Albert, Chris (1993). Sluicing and weak islands. Ms. UC, Santa Cruz.Find this resource:

(p. 1041) Alcántara, Manuel and Nuria Bertomeu (2005). Ellipsis in spontaneous spoken language, in Jennifer Spenander and Petra Hendriks (eds), Proceedings of the cross-modular approaches to ellipsis. Edinburgh: Heriot-Watt University, 1–10.Find this resource:

Alexiadou, Artemis and Kirsten Gengel (2008). NP-ellipsis without focus movement/projection: The role of classifiers. Talk presented at the Workshop on Interface-Based Approaches to Information Structure, University College London.Find this resource:

Alexiadou, Artemis and Kirsten Gengel (2012). NP-ellipsis without focus movement/projections: The role of classifiers, in Ivona Kučerová and Ad Neeleman (eds), Contrast and positions in information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 177–205.Find this resource:

Algryani, Ali (2012). The syntax of ellipsis in Libyan Arabic: A generative analysis of sluicing, VP ellipsis, stripping and negative contrast. PhD thesis, Newcastle University.Find this resource:

Algueró, Anna, Anna Gavarró, Maria Teresa Guasti, Laurice Tuller, Philippe Prévost, Adriana Belletti, Luca Cilibrasi, Hélène Delage, and Mirta Vernice (2012). The acquisition of partitive clitics in Romance five-year-olds, IBERIA: An International Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 3(2): 1–19.Find this resource:

Almeida, Diogo A. de A. and Masaya Yoshida (2007). A problem for the preposition stranding generalization, Linguistic Inquiry 38(2): 349–62.Find this resource:

Alonso-Ovalle, Luis (2006). Disjunction in alternative semantics. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts.Find this resource:

Alrenga, Peter, Chris Kennedy, and Jason Merchant (2012). A new standard of comparison, in Nathan Arnett and Ryan Bennet (eds), Proceedings of the 30th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 32–42.Find this resource:

Amaral, Luiz, Marcus Maia, Andrew Nevins, and Tom Roeper (2018). Recursion across domains. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Amaral, Luiz and Tom Roeper (2014). Multiple grammars and second language representation, Second Language Research 30(1): 3–36.Find this resource:

Amaral, Patricia, Craige Roberts, and E. Allyn Smith (2007). Review of The Logic of Conventional Implicatures, Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 707–49.Find this resource:

An, Duk-Ho (2007). Syntax at the PF interface: Prosodic mapping, linear order, and deletion. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut at Storrs.Find this resource:

Anand, Pranav and James McCloskey (2015). Annotating the implicit content of sluices, in Adam Meyers, Ines Rehbein, and Heike Zinsmeister (eds), Proceedings of the 9th Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW-IX). Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates, 178–87.Find this resource:

AnderBois, Scott (2010). Sluicing as anaphora to issues, in Nan Li and David Lutz (eds), SALT 20: Proceedings of the 20th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 451–70.Find this resource:

AnderBois, Scott (2011). Issues and alternatives. PhD thesis, UC Santa Cruz.Find this resource:

AnderBois, Scott (2012a). Focus and uninformativity in Yucatec Maya questions, Natural Language Semantics 20(4): 349–90.Find this resource:

AnderBois, Scott (2012b). Indefiniteness and the typology of implicit arguments, in Nathan Arnett and Ryan Bennett (eds), Proceedings of the 30th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 30). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 43–53.Find this resource:

AnderBois, Scott (2014). The semantics of sluicing: Beyond truth-conditions, Language 90(4): 887–926.Find this resource:

AnderBois, Scott, Adrian Brasoveanu, and Robert Henderson (2015). At-issue proposals and appositive impositions in discourse, Journal of Semantics 32(1): 93–138.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. (1972). How to get ‘even’, Language 48: 893–905.Find this resource:

Ariel, Mira (1990). Accessing Noun Phrase antecedents. London and New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Arnold, Doug and Robert D. Borsley (2008). Non-restrictive relative clauses, ellipsis and anaphora, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 325–45.Find this resource:

(p. 1042) Arnold, Doug and Robert D. Borsley (2010). Auxiliary-stranding relative clauses, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 47–67.Find this resource:

Arnold, Doug and Andrew Spencer (2015). A constructional analysis for the skeptical, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 41–60.Find this resource:

Arnon, Inbal, Bruno Estigarribia, Philip Hofmeister, Florian Jaeger, Jeanette Pettibone, Ivan A. Sag, and Neal Snider (2005). Rethinking superiority effects: A processing model. Poster presented at the CUNY Sentence Processing Conference, University of Arizona.Find this resource:

Arregi, Karlos (2010). Ellipsis in split questions, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28(3): 539–92.Find this resource:

Arregi, Karlos and Naiara Centeno (2005). Determiner sharing and cyclicity in wh-movement, in Randall Gess and Edward J. Rubin (eds), Theoretical and experimental approaches to Romance Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1–19.Find this resource:

Arregui, Ana, Jr., Charles Clifton, Lyn Frazier, and Keir Moulton (2006). Processing elided verb phrases with flawed antecedents: The recycling hypothesis, Journal of Memory and Language 55: 232–46.Find this resource:

Asher, Nicholas (1993). Reference to abstract objects in English. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Find this resource:

Asher, Nicholas, Daniel Hardt, and Joan Busquets (2001). Discourse parallelism, ellipsis, and ambiguity, Journal of Semantics 18(1): 1–25.Find this resource:

Asher, Nicholas and Alex Lascarides (2003). Logics of conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Ashton, Ethel O. (1944). Swahili grammar, including intonation. London: Longman.Find this resource:

Authier, Jean-Marc (2011). A movement analysis of French modal ellipsis, Probus 23: 175–216.Find this resource:

Authier, Jean-Marc (2012). Ellipsis as movement and silence: Evidence from French, University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(1): 1–9.Find this resource:

Authier, Jean-Marc (2013). Phase-edge features and the syntax of polarity particles, Linguistic Inquiry 44(3): 345–89.Find this resource:

Babby, Leonard H. (1987). Case, prequantifiers, and discontinuous agreement in Russian, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5(1): 91–138.Find this resource:

Bach, Emmon and Barbara H. Partee (1980). Anaphora and semantic structure, in Jody Kreiman and Almerindo E. Ojeda (eds), Papers from the Parasesion on Pronouns and Anaphora. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1–28.Find this resource:

Bachrach, Asaf and Roni Katzir (2009). Right-node raising and delayed spellout, in Kleanthes K. Grohmann (ed.), InterPhases: Phase-theoretic investigations of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 283–316.Find this resource:

Bacskai-Atkari, Julia (2010). Parametric variation and comparative deletion, The Even Yearbook 9: 1–21.Find this resource:

Bacskai-Atkari, Julia (2014). The syntax of comparative constructions: Operators, ellipsis phenomena and functional left peripheries. PhD dissertation, Universität Potsdam.Find this resource:

Bahan, Benjamin, Judy Kegl, Robert G. Lee, Dawn MacLaughlin, and Carol Neidle (2000). The licensing of null arguments in American Sign Language, Linguistic Inquiry 31(1): 1–27.Find this resource:

Bailyn, John Frederick (1995). A configurational approach to Russian ‘free’ word order. PhD thesis, Cornell University.Find this resource:

Bailyn, John Frederick (2004). Generalized inversion, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22(1): 1–49.Find this resource:

Bailyn, John Frederick (2011). Kak tebe lingvistika? Nenavižu! How (not) to analyze Russian verb-stranding constructions. Paper presented at Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 20. MIT, Cambridge, MA.Find this resource:

Bailyn, John Frederick (2012). The syntax of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 1043) Bailyn, John Frederick (2014). The case of Q, in Olga Arnaudova, Wayles Browne, Maria Luisa Rivero, and Danijela Stojanović (eds), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 12: The Ottawa Meeting. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, 1–36.Find this resource:

Bailyn, John Frederick (2017). Against a VP ellipsis account of Russian verb-stranding constructions, in Alexander Vovin (ed.), Studies in Japanese and Korean linguistics and beyond. Boston: Brill, 93–109.Find this resource:

Bailyn, John Frederick and Tanya Scott (2007). Asymmetries in Russian multiple sluicing: A purely syntactic account. Abstract for a talk at FASL (Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics) 15.Find this resource:

Baker, C. L. (1984). Two observations on British English do, Linguistic Inquiry 15(1): 155–7.Find this resource:

Baker, C. L. and Michael Brame (1972). ‘Global rules’: A rejoinder, Language 48(1): 51–75.Find this resource:

Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson, and Ian Roberts (1989). Passive arguments raised, Linguistic Inquiry 20(2): 219–51.Find this resource:

Bakker, Dik (1968). Samentrekking in Nederlandse syntactische groepen. PhD thesis, Leiden University.Find this resource:

Baltin, Mark (1993). Negation and clause structure. Ms. New York University.Find this resource:

Baltin, Mark (2004). The position of adverbials. Ms. New York University.Find this resource:

Baltin, Mark (2006). The nonunity of VP-preposing, Language 82(4): 734–66.Find this resource:

Baltin, Mark (2007). Deletion versus pro-forms: A false dichotomy? Ms. New York University.Find this resource:

Baltin, Mark (2012). Deletion versus pro-forms: An overly simple dichotomy? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30: 381–423.Find this resource:

Banfield, Ann (1981). Stylistic deletion in coordinate structures, Linguistic Analysis 7: 1–32.Find this resource:

Bánréti, Zoltán (1992). A mellérendelés, in Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan. Mondattan. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 715–96.Find this resource:

Bánréti, Zoltán (2001). Multiple lexical selection and parallelism in Hungarian VP-ellipsis, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 48: 25–58.Find this resource:

Bánréti, Zoltán (2007). A mellérendelés és az ellipszis nyelvtana a magyarban. Budapest: Tinta Könyvki-adó.Find this resource:

Barbiers, Sjef (2000). The right-periphery in SOV-languages, in Peter Svenonius (ed.), The derivation of VO and OV. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 181–219.Find this resource:

Barker, Chris (1998). Partitives, double genitives and anti-uniqueness, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16(4): 679–717.Find this resource:

Barker, Chris (2007). Parasitic scope. Linguistics and Philosophy 30. 3: 407–44.Find this resource:

Barker, Chris (2013). Scopability and sluicing, Linguistics and Philosophy 36: 187–223.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew (2012a). Sluiced fragment answers: Another puzzle involving islands and ellipsis, Snippets 25: 5–6.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew (2012b). Else-modification as a diagnosis for pseudosluicing. Ms. Rutgers University.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew (2013). Harmonic sluicing: Which remnant/correlate pairs work and why, in SALT 23: Proceedings of the 23rd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 295–315.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew (2014a). A non-repair approach to island sensitivity in contrastive TP ellipsis, in Proceedings from the 48th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 61–75.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew (2014b). Sluicing and identity in ellipsis. PhD thesis, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew and Jeroen van Craenenbroeck (2013). Tag questions and ellipsis. Paper presented at Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft, Theme session: Parentheses and ellipsis: Crosslinguistic and theoretical perspectives.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew, Patrick Elliott, and Gary Thoms (2014). There is no island repair. Ms., Rutgers University, University College London, and University of Edinburgh.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew, Patrick Elliott, and Gary Thoms (2015). More variation in island repair: The clausal/non-clausal island distinction, in Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, ch. 2.Find this resource:

(p. 1044) Barros, Matthew and Luis Vicente (2011). Right node raising requires both ellipsis and multidomination, University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(1): 1–9.Find this resource:

Barros, Matthew and Luis Vicente (2016). A remnant condition for ellipsis, in Kyeong-min Kim, Pocholo Umbal, Trevor Block, Queenie Chan, Tanie Cheng, Kelli Finney, Mara Katz, Sophie Nickel-Thompson, and Lisa Shorten (eds), Proceedings of the 33rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 57–66.Find this resource:

Barss, Andrew (1986). Chains and anaphoric dependence: On reconstruction and its implications. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Find this resource:

Bartlett, Laura and Kay González-Vilbazo (2010). Classifiers in Spanish-Taiwanese code-switching, in Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1–15.Find this resource:

Bartlett, Laura and Kay González-Vilbazo (2013). The structure of the Taiwanese DP in Taiwanese–Spanish bilinguals: Evidence from code-switching, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 22(1): 65–99.Find this resource:

Barton, Ellen (1990). Nonsentential constituents: A theory of grammatical structure and pragmatic interpretation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Barton, Ellen (2006). Toward a nonsentential analysis in generative grammar, in Ljiljana Progovac, Kate Paesani, Eugenia Casielles, and Ellen Barton (eds), The syntax of nonsententials: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 11–32.Find this resource:

Barton, Ellen and Ljiljana Progovac (2006). Nonsententials in Minimalism, in Reinaldo Elugardo and Robert J. Stainton (eds), Ellipsis and nonsentential speech. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Springer, 71–93.Find this resource:

Bartos, Huba (2000a). Az inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere, in Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3: Morfológia. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 653–761.Find this resource:

Bartos, Huba (2000b). VP-ellipsis and verbal inflection in Hungarian, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 47: 3–23.Find this resource:

Bartos, Huba (2001a). A mutató névmási módosítók a magyarban: Egyeztetés vagy osztozás? in Marianne Barkó-Nagy, Zoltán Bánréti, and Katalin É. Kiss (eds), Újabb tanulmányok a strukturális magyar nyelvtan és a nyelvtörtenet köréből. Budapest: Osiris, 19–41.Find this resource:

Bartos, Huba (2001b). Sound–form non-insertion and the direction of ellipsis, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 48(3): 3–24.Find this resource:

Bartsch, Renate and Theo Vennemann (1972). Semantic structures. Frankfurt am Main: Athenaeum.Find this resource:

Barwise, John and John Etchemendy (1987). The liar. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Barwise, John and John Perry (1983). Situations and attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bassong, Paul Roger (2014). Information structure and the Basa’a left peripheral. PhD thesis, University of Yaounde I.Find this resource:

Beaver, David I. (2004). The optimization of discourse anaphora, Linguistics and Philosophy 27(1): 3–56.Find this resource:

Beaver, David I. and Brady C. Clark (2008). Sense and sensitivity: How focus determines meaning. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

Beavers, John and Ivan A. Sag (2004). Coordinate ellipsis and apparent non-constituent coordination, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 48–69.Find this resource:

Bech, Gunnar (1983). Studien über das deutsche Verbum infinitum. Tübingen: M. Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Beck, Sigrid (2011). Comparison constructions, in Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, and Paul Portner (eds), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1341–89.Find this resource:

Beck, Sigrid, Svetlana Krasikova, Daniel Fleischer, Remus Gergel, Christiane Savelsberg, John Vanderelst, and Elisabeth Villalta (2009). Crosslinguistic variation in comparison constructions, Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9: 1–66.Find this resource:

Beck, Sigrid and Uli Sauerland (2000). Cumulation is needed: A reply to Winter (2000), Natural Language Semantics 8(4): 349–71.Find this resource:

(p. 1045) Beckman, Mary E. (1996). The parsing of prosody, Language and Cognitive Processes 11: 17–67.Find this resource:

Beckman, Mary E. and Gayle E. Elam (1997). Guidelines for ToBI labeling, Version 3. Ms. Ohio State University.Find this resource:

Beckman, Mary E., Julia Hirschberg, and Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel (2006). The original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework, in Sun-Ah Jun (ed.), Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 9–54.Find this resource:

Beckman, Mary E. and Janet B. Pierrehumbert (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English, Phonology Yearbook 3: 255–309.Find this resource:

Beckman, Mary E. and Jennifer J. Venditti (2011). Intonation, in John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle, and Alan C. L. Yu (eds), Handbook of Phonological Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 485–532.Find this resource:

Beecher, Henry (2008). Pragmatic inference in the interpretation of sluiced prepositional phrases, San Diego Linguistics Papers 3: 2–10.Find this resource:

Belazi, Hedi M., Edward J. Rubin, and Almeida Jacqueline Toribio (1994). Code switching and X-bar theory: The functional head constraint, Linguistic Inquiry 25(2): 221–38.Find this resource:

Belletti, Adriana (2004). Aspects of the low IP area, in Luigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 16–51.Find this resource:

Belletti, Adriana and Ur Shlonsky (1995). The order of verbal complements: A comparative study, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13(3): 489–526.Find this resource:

Bennett, Ryan, Emily Elfner, and James McCloskey (2015). Prosody, focus, and ellipsis in Irish. Ms. Yale University, University of British Columbia, and University of California, Santa Cruz.Find this resource:

Bennis, Hans (1977). Het kwantitatieve er in komparatiefconstructies, Spektator 6: 384–7.Find this resource:

Bennis, Hans (1978). Comparative deletion is subdeletion. Master’s thesis, University of Amsterdam.Find this resource:

Bennis, Hans (1986). Gaps and dummies. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Find this resource:

Bentzen, Kristine, Jason Merchant, and Peter Svenonius (2013). Deep properties of surface pronouns: Pronominal predicate anaphors in Norwegian and German, Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 16(2): 97–125.Find this resource:

Bergsma, Shane, David Yarowsky, and Kenneth Church (2011). Using large monolingual and bilingual corpora to improve coordination disambiguation, in Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1346–55.Find this resource:

Bernolet, Sarah, Robert Hartsuiker, and Simona Collina (2016). The persistence of syntactic priming revisited, Journal of Memory and Language 91: 99–116.Find this resource:

Bernstein, Judy (1993). The syntactic role of word markers in null nominal constructions, Probus 5: 5–38.Find this resource:

Bertomeu, Nuria and Valia Kordoni (2005). Integrating pragmatic information in grammar: An analysis of intersentential ellipsis, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 46–69.Find this resource:

den Besten, Hans (1978). On the presence and absence of wh-elements in Dutch comparatives, Linguistic Inquiry 9(4): 641–71.Find this resource:

de Beuzeville, Louise, Trevor Johnston, and Adam Schembri (2009). The use of space with indicating verbs in Auslan: A corpus-based investigation, Sign Language and Linguistics 12: 53–82.Find this resource:

Bever, Thomas G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structure, in John R. Hayes (ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: John Wiley, 279–362.Find this resource:

Bezuidenhout, Anne (2013). Structuring silence versus the structure of silance, in Laurence Goldstein (ed.), Brevity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 36–52.Find this resource:

Bhat, D. N. Shankar (2000). The indefinite-interrogative puzzle, Linguistic Typology 4: 365–400.Find this resource:

Bhatt, Rajesh (2015). Relative clauses and correlatives, in Artemis Alexiadou and Tibor Kiss (eds), Syntax: Theory and Analysis. An International Handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 708–49.Find this resource:

Bhatt, Rajesh and Roumyana Pancheva (2004). Late merger of degree clauses, Linguistic Inquiry 35(1): 1–46.Find this resource:

(p. 1046) Bhatt, Rajesh and Shoichi Takahashi (2007). Direct comparisons: Resurrecting the direct analysis of phrasal comparatives, in Masayuki Gibson and Tova Friedman (eds), SALT 17: Proceedings of the 17th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 19–36.Find this resource:

Bhatt, Rajesh and Shoichi Takahashi (2011). Reduced and unreduced phrasal comparatives, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29(3): 581–620.Find this resource:

Bhattacharya, Tanmoy and Andrew Simpson (2012). Sluicing in Indo-Aryan: An investigation of Bangla and Hindi, in Jason Merchant and Andrew Simpson (eds), Sluicing: Cross-linguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 183–218.Find this resource:

Bianchi, Valentina (2004). Resumptive relatives and LF chains, in Luigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 76–114.Find this resource:

Biezma, Maria (2014). Multiple focus strategies in pro-drop languages: Evidence from ellipsis in Spanish, Syntax 17: 91–131.Find this resource:

Bîlbîie, Gabriela (2011). Grammaire des constructions elliptiques: Une étude comparative des phrases sans verbe en roumain et en français. PhD thesis, Université Paris Diderot.Find this resource:

Bîlbîie, Gabriela (2013). A quantitative study on right node raising in the Penn treebank. Presentation at the International Congress of Linguists, Geneva.Find this resource:

Bjorkman, Bronwyn (2011). BE-ing default: The morphosyntax of auxiliaries. PhD thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Blackburn, Patrick and Wilfried Meyer-Viol (1994). Linguistics, logic and finite trees, Logic Journal of the Interest Group of Pure and Applied Logics 2(1): 3–29.Find this resource:

Blom, A. (1975). Against conjunction reduction, in A. Kraak (ed.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1972–1973. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 128–40.Find this resource:

Blom, Elma, Daniela Polišenská, and Fred Weerman (2008). Articles, adjectives and age of onset: The acquisition of Dutch grammatical gender, Second Language Research 24(3): 297–331.Find this resource:

Boas, H. C. (ed.) (2010). Contrastive studies in construction grammar, vol. 10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bobaljik, Jonathan and Cynthia Zocca (2010). Gender markedness: The anatomy of a counter-example, Morphology 21: 1–26.Find this resource:

Bochnak, Michael (2013). Cross-linguistic variation in the semantics of comparatives. PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.Find this resource:

Bock, Kathryn and Zenzi M. Griffin (2000). The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology 129(2): 177–92.Find this resource:

Bolinger, Dwight (1978). Asking more than one thing at a time, in Henry Hiz (ed.), Questions. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 107–50.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier and Danièle Godard (2008). On the syntax of direct quotation in French, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 358–77.Find this resource:

de Bont, A. P. (1962). Dialekt van Kempenland. Meer in het bijzonder d’Oerse taol. Deel 1. Klank- en vormleer en enige syntactische bijzonderheden. Assen: Van Gorcum.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert (1985). Coordination reduction in complex words: A case for prosodic phonology, in Harry van der Hulst and N. Smith (eds), Advances in Nonlinear Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 143–60.Find this resource:

Boone, Enrico (2014). The syntax and licensing of gapping and fragments. PhD thesis, Leiden University.Find this resource:

Borsley, Robert D. (2005). Against ConjP, Lingua 115: 461–82.Find this resource:

Bos, Johan and Jennifer Spenader (2011). An annotated corpus for the analysis of VP ellipsis, Language Resources and Evaluation 45(4): 463–94.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (1994). D-structure, Theta-Criterion and movement into theta-positions, Linguistic Analysis 24: 247–86.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (1997). Fronting wh-phrases in Serbo-Croatian, in Martina Lindseth and Steven Franks (eds), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Indiana meeting. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, 86–107.Find this resource:

(p. 1047) Bošković, Željko (1998). Wh-movement and wh-phrases in Slavic. Position paper presented at the Comparative Slavic Morphosyntax Workshop, Spencer, IN.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (1999). On multiple feature checking: Multiple wh-fronting and multiple head movement, in Samuel Epstein and Norbert Hornstein (eds), Working minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 159–87.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2000). Sometimes in [Spec, CP], sometimes in situ, in Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka (eds), Step by step. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 53–156.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2002). On multiple wh-fronting, Linguistic Inquiry 33(3): 351–83.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2003). On the interpretation of multiple questions, Linguistic Variation Yearbook 1: 1–15.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2004a). Be careful where you float your quantifiers, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22(4): 681–742.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2004b). Two notes on Right Node Raising, University of Connecticut Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 13–24.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2008). What will you have, DP or NP? in Emily Elfner and Martin Walkow (eds), NELS 37: Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 101–14.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2011). Rescue by PF deletion, traces as (non)interveners, and the that-trace effect, Linguistic Inquiry 42(1): 1–44.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2013a). Adjectival escapades, in Steven Franks, Markus Dickinson, George Fowler, Melissa Witcombe, and Ksenia Zanon (eds), Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 21. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, 1–25.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2013b). Traces do not head islands: What can deletion rescue? in Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi, Koji Sugisaki, and Asako Uchibori (eds), Deep insights, broad perspectives: Essays in honor of Mamuro Saito. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, 56–93.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2014). Now I’m a phase, now I’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis, Linguistic Inquiry 45(1): 27–89.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2016). On pronouns, clitic doubling and argument ellipsis: Argument ellipsis as predicate ellipsis. Ms. University of Connecticut, Storrs.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko (2017). On clitic doubling and argument ellipsis, in Aaron Kaplan, Abby Kaplan, Miranda K. McCarvel, and Edward J. Rubin (eds), Proceedings of the 34th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 97–106.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko and Steven Franks (2000). Across-the-board movement and LF, Syntax 3(2): 107–28.Find this resource:

Bošković, Željko and Daiko Takahashi (1998). Scrambling and last resort, Linguistic Inquiry 29(3): 347–66.Find this resource:

Bosque, Ignacio (1984). Negación y ellipsis, Estudios de Lingüística 2: 171–99.Find this resource:

Bouchard, Denis (2002). Adjectives, number and interfaces: Why languages vary. Oxford: Elsevier Science.Find this resource:

Bouton, L. F. (1970). Antecedent contained pro-forms, in Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 154–67.Find this resource:

Bowers, John (2002). Transitivity, Linguistic Inquiry 33(2): 183–234.Find this resource:

Brame, Michael (1983). Ungrammatical notes 4: Smarter than me, Linguistic Analysis 12(3): 323–8.Find this resource:

Branco, António and Francisco Costa (2006). Noun ellipsis without empty categories, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 81–101.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan (1971). A note on the notion ‘identity of sense anaphora’, Linguistic Inquiry 2(4): 589–97.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan (1973). Syntax of the comparative clause construction in English, Linguistic Inquiry 4(3): 275–343.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan (1974). The position of certain clause-particles in phrase structure, Linguistic Inquiry 5(4): 614–19.Find this resource:

(p. 1048) Bresnan, Joan (1975). Comparative deletion and constraints on transformations, Linguistic Analysis 1(1): 25–74.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan (1976). On the form and functioning of transformations, Linguistic Inquiry 7(1): 3–40.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan and Sam A. Mchombo (1995). The lexical integrity principle: Evidence from Bantu, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13(2): 181–254.Find this resource:

Brody, Mihály (1990). Remarks on the order of elements in the Hungarian focus field, in István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian 3. Szeged: JATE Press, 95–122.Find this resource:

Brody, Mihály (1995). Focus and checking theory, in István Kenesei (ed.), Levels and structures. Approaches to Hungarian 5. Szeged: JATE Press, 29–44.Find this resource:

Broekhuis, Hans (2013). Syntax of Dutch: Adjectives and adjective phrases. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Find this resource:

Broekhuis, Hans and Norbert Corver (2015). Syntax of Dutch: Verbs and verb phrases, vol. II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Find this resource:

Brown, Roger (1958). How shall a thing be called? Psychological Review 65(1): 14–21.Find this resource:

Brown-Schmidt, Sarah, Christine Gunlogson, and Michael K. Tanenhaus (2008). Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation, Cognition 107(3): 1122–36.Find this resource:

Brucart, José María (1987). La elisión sintáctica en español. Bellaterra: Publicacions de la Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.Find this resource:

Brucart, José María (1999). La ellipsis, in Ignacio Bosque and Violeta Demonte (eds), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 1787–866.Find this resource:

Brucart, José María and Jonathan E. MacDonald (2013). Empty categories and ellipsis, in José Ignacio Hualde, Antxon Olarrea, and Erin O’Rourke (eds), The handbook of Hispanic linguistics. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons.Find this resource:

Bruening, Benjamin (2015). Passive do so. Ms. University of Delaware.Find this resource:

Brugos, Alenja, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel, and Nanette Veilleux (2006). Transcribing prosodic structure of spoken utterances with ToBI. Tutorial through MIT OpenCourseWare.Find this resource:

Bruner, Jerome Seymour (1957). On perceptual readiness, Psychological Review 64: 123–52.Find this resource:

Buell, Leston (2005). Issues in Zulu verbal morphosyntax. PhD thesis, UCLA.Find this resource:

Büring, Daniel (2003). On D-trees, beans, and B-accents, Linguistics and Philosophy 26: 511–45.Find this resource:

Büring, Daniel (2005). Binding theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Büring, Daniel and Katharina Hartmann (1998). Asymmetrische Koordination, Linguistische Berichte 174: 172–201.Find this resource:

Burton, Strang and Jane Grimshaw (1992). Coordination and VP-internal subjects, Linguistic Inquiry 23(2): 305–12.Find this resource:

Busquets, Joan and Pascal Denis (2001). L’ellipse modale en français: Le cas de pouvoir et devoir, Cahiers de Grammaire 26: 55–74.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins, and William Pagliuca (1994). The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Byrant, Doreen (2006). Koordinationsellipsen im Spracherwerb: Die Verarbitung potentieller Gapping-Strukturen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia (2006). Pronouns, determiners and N-ellipsis in Spanish, French, and German, in Christopher Davis, Amy Rose Deal, and Youri Zabbal (eds), NELS 36: Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 167–78.Find this resource:

Caha, Pavel (2009). The nanosyntax of case. PhD thesis, University of Tromsø.Find this resource:

Caha, Pavel (2011). Case in adpositional phrases. Ms. CASTL, Tromsø.Find this resource:

Cai, Zhenguang G., Martin J. Pickering, and Patrick Sturt (2013). Processing verb-phrase ellipsis in Mandarin Chinese: Evidence against the syntactic account, Language and Cognitive Processes 28: 810–28.Find this resource:

(p. 1049) Camacho, José (2003). The structure of coordination: Conjunction and agreement phenomena in Spanish and other languages. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Find this resource:

Cann, Ronnie (2011). Towards an account of the English auxiliary system: Building interpretations incrementally, in Ruth Kempson, Eleni Gregoromichelaki, and Christine Howes (eds), Dynamics of lexical interfaces. Chicago: CSLI Press, 279–317.Find this resource:

Cann, Ronnie, Ruth Kempson, and Lutz Marten (2005). The dynamics of language. Oxford: Elsevier.Find this resource:

Cann, Ronnie, Ruth Kempson, and Matthew Purver (2007). Context and well-formedness: The dynamics of ellipsis, Research on Language and Computation 5(3): 333–58.Find this resource:

Cantone, Katja Francesca (2007). Code-switching in bilingual children. Berlin: Springer.Find this resource:

Cantor, Sara (2013). Ungrammatical double-island sluicing as a diagnostic of left-branch positioning. Master’s thesis, University of California at Santa Cruz.Find this resource:

Caplan, David and Gloria S. Waters (1999). Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 77–126.Find this resource:

Caponigro, Ivano and Kathryn Davidson (2011). Ask and tell as well: Clausal question-answer pairs in ASL, Natural Language Semantics 19: 323–71.Find this resource:

Caramazza, Alfonso (1984). The logic of neuropsychological research and the problem of patient classification in aphasia, Brain and Language 21: 9–20.Find this resource:

Caramazza, Alfonso and Edgar Zurif (1976). Dissociations of algorithmic and heuristic processes in sentence comprehension: Evidence from aphasia, Brain and Language 3: 572–82.Find this resource:

Carberry, Sandra (1989). A pragmatics-based approach to ellipsis resolution, Computational Linguistics 15(2): 75–96.Find this resource:

Cardinaletti, Anna (1994). On the internal structure of pronominal DPs, The Linguistic Review 11(3–4): 195–220.Find this resource:

Carlson, Greg (1987). Same and different: Some consequences for syntax and semantics, Linguistics and Philosophy 10(4): 531–66.Find this resource:

Carlson, Katy (2001). The effects of parallelism and prosody on the processing of gapping structures, Language and Speech 44: 1–26.Find this resource:

Carlson, Katy (2002). Parallelism and prosody in the processing of ellipsis sentences. New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Carlson, Katy, Michael Walsh Dickey, Lyn Frazier, and Charles Clifton Jr (2009a). Information structure expectations in sentence comprehension, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62: 114–39.Find this resource:

Carlson, Katy, Michael Walsh Dickey, and Christopher Kennedy (2005). Structural economy in the processing and representation of gapping sentences, Syntax 8: 208–28.Find this resource:

Carlson, Katy, Lyn Frazier, and Charles Clifton, Jr. (2009b). How prosody constrains comprehension: A limited effect of prosodic packaging, Lingua 119(7): 1066–82.Find this resource:

Carroll, John M., Thomas G. Bever, and Chava R. Pollack (1981). The non-uniqueness of linguistic intuitions, Language 57(2): 368–83.Find this resource:

Casielles, Eugenia (2006). Big questions, small answers, in Ljiljana Progovac, Kate Paesani, Eugenia Casielles, and Ellen Barton (eds), The syntax of nonsententials: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 117–45.Find this resource:

Cassimjee, Farida and Charles W. Kisseberth (1998). Optimal Domains Theory and Bantu tonology, in Larry M. Hyman and Charles W. Kisseberth (eds), Theoretical aspects of Bantu tone. Stanford: CSLI, 33–132.Find this resource:

Cassimjee, Farida and Charles W. Kisseberth (in preparation). The Shingazidja lexicon exemplified. Ms. Columbia University and Tel Aviv University.Find this resource:

Cattell, Ray (1976). Constraints on movement rules, Language 52: 18–50.Find this resource:

Cecchetto, Carlo, Alessandra Cecchetto, Carlo Geraci, Mirko Santoro, and Sandro Zucchi (2015). The syntax of predicate ellipsis in Italian Sign Language (LIS), Lingua 166: 214–35.Find this resource:

(p. 1050) Cecchetto, Carlo and Orin Percus (2006). When we do that and when we don’t: A contrastive analysis of VP-ellipsis and VP-anaphora, in Mara Frascarelli (ed.), Phases of interpretation. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 71–105.Find this resource:

Centeno, Naiara (2011). Gapping and determiner sharing in Spanish. PhD thesis, University of the Basque Country, Vitoria-Gasteiz.Find this resource:

Chae, Jeongmin, Younghee Jung, Taemin Lee, Soonyoung Jung, Chan Huh, Gilhan Kim, Hyeoncheoi Kim, and Heungbum Oh (2014). Identifying non-elliptical entity mentions in a coordinated NP with ellipses, Journal of Biomedical Informatics 47: 139–52.Find this resource:

Chafe, Wallace L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view, in Charles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press, 25–55.Find this resource:

Chalcraft, Faye (2006). Do-doubling in West Yorkshire English. Paper presented at the workshop Syntactic Doubling in European Dialects.Find this resource:

Chao, Wynn (1988). On ellipsis. New York and London: Garland Press.Find this resource:

Charlow, Simon (2008). Free and bound pro-verbs: A unified treatment of anaphora, in Tova Friedman and Satoshi Ito (eds), SALT 8: Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 194–211.Find this resource:

Charlow, Simon (2012). Cross-categorial donkeys, in Maria Aloni, Vadim Kimmelman, Floris Roelofsen, Galit W. Sassoon, Katrin Schulz, and Matthijs Westera (eds), Logic, language, and meaning. Berlin: Springer, 261–70.Find this resource:

Charlow, Simon (2014). On the semantics of exceptional scope. PhD thesis, NYU.Find this resource:

Chaves, Rui P. (2006). Coordination of unlikes without inlike categories, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 102–22.Find this resource:

Chaves, Rui P. (2007). Coordinate structures: constraint-based syntax-semantics. PhD thesis, University of Lisbon.Find this resource:

Chaves, Rui P. (2008). Linearization-based word-part ellipsis, Linguistics and Philosophy 31: 261–307.Find this resource:

Chaves, Rui P. (2009). A linearization-based approach to gapping, in James Rogers (ed.), Proceedings of FG-MoL 2005 The 10th Conference on Formal Grammar and the 9th Meeting on Mathematics of Language. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 205–18.Find this resource:

Chaves, Rui P. (2012). Conjunction, cumulation and respectively readings, Journal of Linguistics 48: 297–344.Find this resource:

Chaves, Rui P. (2014). On the disunity of right-node phenomena: Extraposition, ellipsis, and deletion, Language 90: 834–86.Find this resource:

Chien, Yu-Chin and Kenneth Wexler (1990). Children’s knowledge of locality conditions as evidence for the modularity of syntax and pragmatics, Language Acquisition 1: 225–95.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1955). The logical structure of linguistic theory. Ms. Harvard University and MIT. (Revised 1956 version published in part by New York: Plenum, 1975; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985).Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton & Co.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1964). Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton & Co.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1971). Deep structure, surface structure and semantic interpretaion, in Danny Steinberg and Leon Jacobovits (eds), Semantics. London: Cambridge University Press, 183–216.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1972a). Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar, in Stanley Peters (ed.), The goals of linguistic theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 63–130.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1972b). Studies on semantics in generative grammar. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1973). Conditions on transformations, in Stephen Anderson and Paul Kiparsky (eds), Festschrift for Morris Halle. London: Rinehart and Winston, 232–86.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1977a). Conditions on transformations, in Essays on form and interpretation. New York: Elsevier North-Holland, 81–162.Find this resource:

(p. 1051) Chomsky, Noam (1977b). On wh-movement, in P. Culicover, T. Wasow, and A. Akmajian (eds), Formal syntax. New York: Academic Press, 71–132.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1982). Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1991). Some notes on economy of derivation and representation, in Robert Freidin (ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 417–54.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1995a). Bare phrase structure, in Gert Webelhuth (ed.), Government binding theory and the minimalist program. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 383–439.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (1995b). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework, in Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka (eds), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89–156.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2001). Derivation by phase, in Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy, in Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 104–31.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2005). Three factors in language design, Linguistic Inquiry 36(1): 1–22.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2008). On phases, in Robert Freidin, Carlos Otero, and Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds), Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 133–66.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2013). Problems of projection, Lingua 130: 33–49.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam (2014). Minimal recursion: Exploring the prospects, in Tom Roeper and Margaret Speas (eds), Recursion: Complexity in cognition. Berlin: Springer, 1–15.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam and Howard Lasnik (1993). The theory of Principles and Parameters, in Arnim von Stechow, W. Sternefeld and T. Vennemann (eds), Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 506–69.Find this resource:

Chung, Sandra (2006). Sluicing and the lexicon: The point of no return, in Rebecca T. Cover and Yuni Kim (eds), Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, vol. 31. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 73–91.Find this resource:

Chung, Sandra (2013). Syntactic identity in sluicing: How much and why, Linguistic Inquiry 44(1): 1–44.Find this resource:

Chung, Sandra, William A. Ladusaw, and James McCloskey (1995). Sluicing and Logical Form, Natural Language Semantics 3(3): 239–82.Find this resource:

Chung, Sandra, William A. Ladusaw and James McCloskey (2011). Sluicing(:) Between structure and inference, in Rodrígo Gutiérrez-Bravo, Line Mikkelsen, and Eric Potsdam (eds), Representing language: Essays in honor of Judith Aissen. Santa Cruz: Linguistics Research Center, 31–50.Find this resource:

Ciardelli, Ivano (2009). Inquisitive semantics and intermediate logics. Master’s thesis, University of Amsterdam.Find this resource:

Ciardelli, Ivano, Jeroen Groenendijk, and Floris Roelofsen (2011). Attention! Might in Inquisitive Semantics, in Ed Cormany, Satoshi Ito, and David Lutz (eds), SALT 19: Proceedings of the 19th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 91–108.Find this resource:

Ciardelli, Ivano, Jeroen Groenendijk, and Floris Roelofsen (2013). Inquisitive semantics: A new notion of meaning, Language and Linguistics Compass 7(9): 459–76.Find this resource:

Cinque, Guglielmo (1990). Types of A′-dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Cinque, Guglielmo (2004). ‘Restructuring’ and functional structure, in Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 132–91.Find this resource:

Cinque, Guglielmo (2005). Deriving Greenberg’s universal 20 and its exceptions, Linguistic Inquiry 36(3): 315–32.Find this resource:

Cinque, Guglielmo (2006). Restructuring and functional heads: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 4. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 1052) Citko, Barbara (2005). On the nature of merge: External merge, internal merge, and parallel merge, Linguistic Inquiry 36(4): 475–96.Find this resource:

Citko, Barbara (2007). Determiner sharing from a crosslinguistic perspective, in Pierre Pica (ed.), Linguistic variation yearbook 2006. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 73–96.Find this resource:

Citko, Barbara (2011). Symmetry in syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Citko, Barbara (2015). To gap or to Right Node Raise. Presentation at Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 24, New York.Find this resource:

Citko, Barbara and Martina Gračanin-Yuksek (2013). Towards a new typology of coordinated wh-questions, Journal of Linguistics 49(1): 1–32.Find this resource:

Clark, Herbert (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Clark, Herbert and Jean Fox Tree (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking, Cognition 84: 73–111.Find this resource:

Clifton, Charles, Jr (2014). The (non)effect of discourse relations on comprehending verb phrase ellipsis. Paper presented at Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing.Find this resource:

Clifton, Charles, Jr and Lyn Frazier (2012). Discourse integration guided by Question Under Discussion, Cognitive Psychology 65: 352–79.Find this resource:

Clifton, Charles, Jr and Lyn Frazier (2016). Focus in corrective exchanges: Effects of pitch accent and syntactic form, Language and Speech 59(4): 544–61.Find this resource:

Clifton, Charles, Jr and Lyn Frazier (in progress). Direct and indirect answers to questions. Ms. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Find this resource:

Colbert, Stephen (2007). I am America (and so can you!). New York: Grand Central Publishing.Find this resource:

Cole, Peter, Gabriella Hermon, and Norhaida Aman (to appear). Clefted questions in Malay, in David Gil and James Collins (eds), Malay/Indonesian linguistics. London: Curzon Press.Find this resource:

Collins, James N. (2013). The discourse potential of narrow scope indefinites in Samoan. Ms. Stanford.Find this resource:

Collins, James N., Daria Popova, Ivan A. Sag, and Thomas Wasow (2014). Sluicing and the inquisitive potential of appositives. <https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3c19/115c48599905d2ecce02ab0447567c208601.pdf>.

Conner, Tracy (2014). Heads must be overt: Overtness and ellipsis licensing, in Marlies Kluck and Mark de Vries (eds), Parenthesis and ellipsis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 75–108.Find this resource:

Conner, Tracy (2015). Ellipsis licensing: Testing overtness. Ms. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Find this resource:

Conroy, Anastasia, Jeffrey Lidz, and Julien Musolino (2009). The Fleeting Isomorphism Effect, Language Acquisition 16: 106–17.Find this resource:

Cooper, Robin (2005). Austinian truth, attitudes and type theory, Research on Language and Computation 3(4): 333–62.Find this resource:

Cooper, Robin (2012). Type theory and semantics in flux, in Ruth Kempson, Nicholas Asher, and Tim Fernando (eds), Handbook of the philosophy of science. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 271–323.Find this resource:

Cooper, Robin and Jonathan Ginzburg (2015). Type theory with records for natural language semantics, in Chris Fox and Shalom Lappin (eds), Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 375–407.Find this resource:

Coppen, Peter-Arno (1991). Specifying the Noun Phrase. PhD thesis, Catholic University Nijmegen.Find this resource:

Coppock, Elizabeth (2001). Gapping: In defense of deletion, in Mary Andronis, Christoper Ball, Heidi Elston, and Sylvain Neuvel (eds), Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 133–47.Find this resource:

Coquand, Thierry, Randy Pollack, and Makoto Takeyama (2003). A logical framework with dependent types, Fundamenta Informaticae 20: 1–21.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville (1978). Universals in the syntax of cardinal numbers, Lingua 46: 355–68.Find this resource:

Corblin, Francis, Jean-Marie Marandin, and Petra Sleeman (2003). Nounless determiners, in Francis Corblin and Henriette de Swart (eds), Handbook of French semantics. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 21–38.Find this resource:

Cormack, A. (1984). VP anaphora: Variables and scope, in F. Landman and F. Veltman (eds), Varieties of formal semantics. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 81–102.Find this resource:

(p. 1053) Cornish, Francis (1999). Anaphora, discourse, and understanding: Evidence from French and English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert (1990). The syntax of left branch extractions. PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert (1993). A note on subcomparatives, Linguistic Inquiry 24(4): 773–81.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert (1997). Much-support as a last resort, Linguistic Inquiry 28(1): 119–64.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert (2006). Comparative deletion and subdeletion, in Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 1. Malden, MA and Oxford: Blackwell, 582–637.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert (2014). Freezing effects. Ms. University of Utrecht.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert and Marjo van Koppen (2009). Let’s focus on NP-ellpsis, Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 48: 3–26.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert and Marjo van Koppen (2010). Ellipsis in Dutch possessive noun phrases: A microcomparative approach, Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 13(2): 99–140.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert and Marjo van Koppen (2011). NP-ellipsis with adjectival remnants: A micro-comparative perspective, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29: 371–421.Find this resource:

Corver, Norbert and Marjo van Koppen (2015). Pronominalization and variation in Dutch demonstrative expressions. Ms. Utrecht University. Forthcoming in Tonjes Veenstra (ed.), Demonstratives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Costa, João, Ana Maria Martins, and Fernanda Pratas (2012). VP ellipsis: New evidence from Capeverdean, in Irene Franco, Sara Lusini, and Andrés Saab (eds), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2010. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 155–76.Find this resource:

van de Craats, Ineke, Norbert Corver, and Roeland van Hout (2000). Conservation of grammatical knowledge: On the acquisition of possessive noun phrases by Turkish and Moroccan learners of Dutch, Linguistics 38(2): 221–314.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2004). Ellipsis in Dutch dialects. PhD thesis, Leiden University.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2008). Ellipsis and accommodation: The (morphological) case of sluicing. Paper presented at MIT.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2010a). Invisible last resort: A note on clefts as the underlying source for sluicing, Lingua 120(7): 1714–26.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2010b). The syntax of ellipsis: Evidence from Dutch dialects. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2012a). How do you sluice when there is more than one CP? in Jason Merchant and Andrew Simpson (eds), Sluicing: Cross-linguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 40–67.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2012b). Ellipsis, identity and accommodation. Ms. KU Leuven.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (2017). VP-ellipsis, in Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, 2nd edition. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 1–35.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen and Marcel den Dikken (2006). Ellipsis and EPP repair, Linguistic Inquiry 37(4): 653–64.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen and Anikó Lipták (2005). Ellipsis in Hungarian and the typology of sluicing, in Kiyong Choi and Changguk Kim (eds), Ellipsis in minimalism: Proceedings of the 7th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar. Seoul: Hankook, 103–33.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen and Anikó Lipták (2006). The crosslinguistic syntax of sluicing: Evidence from Hungarian relatives, Syntax 9(3): 248–74.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen and Anikó Lipták (2008). On the interaction between verb movement and ellipsis: New evidence from Hungarian, in Charles B. Chang and Hannah J. Haynie (eds), Proceedings of the 26th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 138–46.Find this resource:

van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen and Anikó Lipták (2013). What sluicing can do, what it can’t and in which language: On the cross-linguistic syntax of ellipsis, in Lisa L.-S. Cheng and Norbert Corver (eds), Diagnosing syntax. New York: Oxford University Press, 502–36.Find this resource:

(p. 1054) van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen and Jason Merchant (2013). Ellipsis phenomena, in Marcel den Dikken (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of generative syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 701–45.Find this resource:

Cremers, Crit (2014). Syntax of Dutch: Ellipsis and grammar. Ms. Leiden University.Find this resource:

Cresswell, Max J. (1976). The semantics of degree, in Barbara Partee (ed.), Montague grammar. New York: Academic Press, 261–92.Find this resource:

Croft, William (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cruse, Alan (1977). The pragmatics of lexical specificity, Journal of Linguistics 13: 153–64.Find this resource:

Crysmann, Berthold (2008). An asymmetric theory of peripheral sharing in HPSG, in Gerald Penn (ed.), Proceedings of FG Vienna: The 8th Conference on Formal Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 45–64.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter (2013a). English (zero-)relatives and the competence-performance distinction, International Review of Pragmatics 5: 253–70.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter (2013b). Grammar and complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter and Ray Jackendoff (2005). Simpler Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter and Ray Jackendoff (2012). A domain-general cognitive relation and how language expresses it, Language 88: 305–40.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter and Paul Postal (eds) (2001). Parasitic gaps. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter and Susanne Winkler (2008). English focus inversion, Journal of Linguistics 44(3): 625–58.Find this resource:

Cutler, Anne and Jerry A. Fodor (1979). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension, Cognition 7: 49–59.Find this resource:

Cyrino, Sonia (2004). On the existence of Null Complement Anaphora in Brazilian Portuguese, Revista Letras 63: 97–117.Find this resource:

Cyrino, Sonia and Gabriela Matos (2002). VP-ellipsis in European and Brazilian Portuguese: A comparative analysis, Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 1: 177–95.Find this resource:

Cyrino, Sonia and Gabriela Matos (2005). Local licensers and recovering in VP ellipsis, Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 4: 79–112.Find this resource:

Cyrino, Sonia and Gabriela Matos (2006). Null Complement Anaphora in Romance: Deep or surface anaphora? in Jenny Doetjes and Paz González (eds), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 95–120.Find this resource:

Dadan, Marcin (2016). Preposition omission in sluicing: Teasing apart LF-copying and PF-deletion, in Christopher Hammerly and Brandon Prickett (eds), NELS 46: Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 251–60.Find this resource:

Dagnac, Anne (2010). Modal ellipsis in French, Spanish and Italian: Evidence for a TP-deletion analysis, in Karlos Arregi, Zsuzsanna Fagyal, Silvina Montrul, and Mireille Tremblay (eds), Romance linguistics 2008: Interactions in Romance. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 157–70.Find this resource:

Dagnac, Anne (2016). Gapping needs vP-coordination: An argument from French NPI licensing, The Linguistic Review 33(4): 503–30.Find this resource:

Dahl, Östen (1973). On so-called sloppy identity, Synthese 26: 81–112.Find this resource:

Dahl, Östen (1974). How to open a sentence: Abstraction in natural language, Logical Grammar Reports 12. University of Götenburg.Find this resource:

Dalrymple, Mary (1991). Against reconstruction in ellipsis. Unpublished ms. Xerox-PARC and CSLI.Find this resource:

Dalrymple, Mary, Stuart M. Shieber, and Fernando C. N. Pereira (1991). Ellipsis and higher-order unification, Linguistics and Philosophy 14(4): 399–452.Find this resource:

Davidson, Kathryn (2013). ‘And’ and ‘or’: General use coordination in ASL, Semantics and Pragmatics 6: 1–44.Find this resource:

Davies, Mark (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990–present. Available online at <http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/>.

(p. 1055) Dayal, Veneeta and Roger Schwarzschild (2010). Definite inner antecedents and wh-correlates in sluices, Rutgers Working Papers in Linguistics 3: 92–114.Find this resource:

Dékány, Éva (2011). A profile of the Hungarian DP: The interaction of lexicalization, agreement and linearization with the functional sequence. PhD thesis, University of Tromsø.Find this resource:

Dékány, Éva (2015). The syntax of anaphoric possessives in Hungarian, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 33(4): 1121–68.Find this resource:

Depiante, Marcela (2000). The syntax of deep and surface anaphora: A study of null complement anaphora and stripping/bare argument ellipsis. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut at Storrs.Find this resource:

Depiante, Marcela (2001). On null complement anaphora in Spanish and Italian, Probus 13(2): 193–221.Find this resource:

Depiante, Marcela and Jorge Hankamer (2005). Non-constituent ellipsis. Talk presented at the Identity in Ellipsis workshop, University of California, Berkeley.Find this resource:

Depiante, Marcela and Pascual Masullo (2001). Género y número en la elipsis nominal: Consecuencias para la hipótesis lexicalista. Talk given at the I Encuentro de gramática Generativa, National University of Comahue.Find this resource:

Desmets, Marianne (2001). Les typages de la phrase en HPSG: Le cas des phrases en ‘omme’. PhD thesis, University of Paris 10.Find this resource:

Desmets, Marianne (2010). Ellipses dans les constructions comparatives en ‘comme’, Linx 58: 47–74.Find this resource:

Dickey, Michael Walsh and Ann C. Bunger (2011). Comprehension of elided structure: Evidence from sluicing, Language and Cognitive Processes 26(1): 63–78.Find this resource:

Dik, Simon (1986). Coordination: Its implications for the theory of general linguistics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Find this resource:

den Dikken, Marcel (2004). Agreement and ‘clause union’, in Katalin É. Kiss and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), Verb clusters: A study of Hungarian, German and Dutch. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 445–98.Find this resource:

den Dikken, Marcel (2006). Either-float and the syntax of co-or-dination, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24(3): 689–749.Find this resource:

den Dikken, Marcel (2011). The distributed morphology of codeswitching. Talk given at the UIC Bilingualism Forum, University of Illinois at Chicago.Find this resource:

den Dikken, Marcel and Shoba Bando-Rao (2014). On v as pivot in codeswitches, and the nature of the ban on word-internal switches, in Jeff MacSwan (ed.), Grammatical theory and bilingual codeswitching. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 161–84.Find this resource:

den Dikken, Marcel, André Meinunger, and Chris Wilder (2000). Pseudoclefts and ellipsis, Studia Linguistica 54: 41–89.Find this resource:

Dillon, Brian, Alan Mishler, Shayne Sloggett, and Colin Phillips (2013). Contrasting intrusion profiles for agreement and anaphora: Experimental and modeling evidence, Journal of Memory and Language 69: 85–103.Find this resource:

Dixon, Robert M. W. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Dixon, Robert M. W. (2010). Basic linguistic theory, vol. 1: Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen (1993). The syntax of Romanian. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Donati, Caterina (1997). Comparative clauses as free relatives: A raising analysis, Probus 9(2): 145–66.Find this resource:

Doron, Edit (1999). V-movement and VP ellipsis, in Shalom Lappin and Elabbas Benmamoun (eds), Studies in ellipsis and gapping. New York: Oxford University Press, 124–40.Find this resource:

Dougherty, Ray C. (1970). A grammar of coordinate conjoined structures, I, Language 46(4): 850–98.Find this resource:

Dougherty, Ray C. (1971). A grammar of coordinate conjoined structures, II, Language 47(1): 298–339.Find this resource:

Dowty, David (1988). Type raising, functional composition, and non-constituent conjunction, in Richard Oehrle, Emmon Bach, and Deirdre Wheeler (eds), Categorial grammars and natural language structures. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 153–97.Find this resource:

Dowty, David, Robert Wall, and Stanley Peters (1981). Introduction to Montague grammar. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Find this resource:

(p. 1056) Drai, Dan and Yosef Grodzinsky (2006a). A new empirical angle on the variability debate: Quantitative neurosyntactic analyses of a large data set from Broca’s aphasia, Brain and Language 76: 117–28.Find this resource:

Drai, Dan and Yosef Grodzinsky (2006b). The variability debate: More statistics, more linguistics, Brain and Language 76: 157–70.Find this resource:

Drummond, Alex (2013). Dahl’s paradigm: In defense of the crossover analysis. Poster presented at NELS 44: the 44th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. University of Connecticut.Find this resource:

Drummond, Alex, Norbert Hornstein, and Howard Lasnik (2010). A puzzle about P-stranding and a possible solution, Linguistic Inquiry 41(4): 689–92.Find this resource:

Dryer, Matthew S. (2006). Descriptive theories, explanatory theories, and Basic Linguistic Theory, in Felix K. Ameka, Alan Dench, and Nicholas Evans (eds), Catching language: Issues in grammar writing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 207–34.Find this resource:

Duffield, Nigel and Ayumi Matsuo (2001). A comparative study of ellipsis and anaphora in L2 acquisition, in Anna H.-J. Do, Laura Domínguez, and Aimee Johansen (eds), Proceedings of the 25th Boston University Conference on Child Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 238–49.Find this resource:

Dvořák, Bostjan (2007). Slovenian clitic pronouns and what is so special about them, Slovene Linguistic Studies 6: 209–33.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (1987). Configurationality in Hungarian. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (1993). Wh-movement and specificity, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11: 83–120.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (ed.) (1995). Discourse configurational languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (1998). Identificational focus and information focus, Language 74: 245–73.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (2002). The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (2008). Free word order, (non)configurationality, and phases, Linguistic Inquiry 39(3): 441–75.Find this resource:

É. Kiss, Katalin (2010). An adjunction analysis of quantifiers and adverbials in the Hungarian sentence, Lingua 120(3): 506–26.Find this resource:

Edelstein, Elspeth (2014). This syntax needs studied, in Lawrence Horn and Rafaella Zanuttini (eds), Microsyntactic variation in North American English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 242–68.Find this resource:

Edwards, John (2004). Foundations of bilingualism, in Tej K. Bhatia and William C. Ritchie (eds), Handbook of bilingualism. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 7–31.Find this resource:

Egg, Markus and Katrin Erk (2002). A compositional account of VP-ellipsis, in Frank van Eynde, Lars Hellan, and Dorothee Beerman (eds), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI, 162–79.Find this resource:

Eguren, Luis (2010). Contrastive focus and nominal ellipsis in Spanish, Lingua 120(2): 435–57.Find this resource:

Eichler, Nadine (2011). Code-Switching bei bilingual aufwachsenden Kindern: Eine Analyse der gemischtsprachlichen Nominalphrasen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Genus. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Find this resource:

Eichler, Nadine and Natascha Müller (2012). The derivation of mixed DPs: Mixing of functional categories in bilingual children and in second language learners, in Marzena Watorek, Sandra Benazzo, and Maya Hickmann (eds), Comparative perspectives on language acquisition: A tribute to Clive Perdue. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 263–81.Find this resource:

Eisenberg, Peter (1973). A note on ‘identity of constituents’, Linguistic Inquiry 4(3): 417–20.Find this resource:

Elbourne, Paul (2001). E-type anaphora as NP deletion, Natural Language Semantics 9(3): 241–88.Find this resource:

Elbourne, Paul (2005). Situations and individuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Elbourne, Paul (2008). Ellipsis sites as definite descriptions, Linguistic Inquiry 39(2): 191–220.Find this resource:

Elbourne, Paul (2013). Definite descriptions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Elliot, Patrick, Andreea Nicolae, and Yasutada Sudo (2014). VP ellipsis without parallel binding: A QUD approach. Poster presented at SALT (Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference) 24.Find this resource:

Embick, David and Alec Marantz (2008). Architecture and blocking, Linguistic Inquiry 39(1): 1–53.Find this resource:

(p. 1057) Emonds, Joseph E. (1978). The verbal complex V’-V in French, Linguistic Inquiry 9: 151–75.Find this resource:

Emonds, Joseph E. (1985). A unified theory of syntactic categories. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Find this resource:

Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth (1993). Space in Danish Sign Language: The space and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.Find this resource:

Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth (2002). Grammatical relations in Danish Sign Language, in Anneli Pajunen (ed.), Mimesis, sign, and the evolution of language. Turku: University of Turku Press, 5–40.Find this resource:

Engdahl, Elisabet (1983). Parasitic gaps, Linguistics and Philosophy 6(1): 5–34.Find this resource:

Engdahl, Elisabet (1986). Constituent questions. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Find this resource:

Engel, Ulrich (1994). Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Find this resource:

Epstein, Samuel (1995). A derivational approach to syntactic relations. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University.Find this resource:

Eroms, Hans-Werner (2000). Syntax der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Erschler, David (2016). On embedded gapping. Talk presented at IATL 32: The 32nd annual meeting of the Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics.Find this resource:

Erteschik, Naomi (1973). On the nature of island constraints. PhD dissertation, MIT.Find this resource:

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi (1998). The syntax-focus interface, in Peter W. Culicover and Louise McNally (eds), The limits of syntax. San Diego: Academic Press, 211–40.Find this resource:

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi (2007). The syntax-discourse interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi, Lena Ibn-Bari, and Sharon Taube (2011). Object ellipsis as topic drop. Ms. Ben Gurion University of the Negev.Find this resource:

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi, Lena Ibn-Bari, and Sharon Taube (2013). Missing objects as topic drop, Lingua 136: 145–69.Find this resource:

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi and Shalom Lappin (1979). Dominance and the functional explanation of island phenomena, Theoretical Linguistics 6: 41–86.Find this resource:

Eshghi, Arash, Christine Howes, Eleni Gregoromichelaki, Julian Hough, and Matthew Purver (2015). Feedback in conversation as incremental semantic update, in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computational Semantics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 261–71.Find this resource:

Evans, Frederic (1988). Binding into anaphoric verb phrases, in Joyce Powers and Kenneth de Jong (eds), Proceedings of the 5th Annual Eastern States Conference on Linguistics. Ohio: ESCOL Publications Committee, Linguistics Department, Ohio State University, 122–9.Find this resource:

Evans, N. and S. C. Levinson (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(5), 429–48.Find this resource:

Fanselow, Gisbert and Stefan Frisch (2006). Effects of processing difficulty on judgments of acceptability, in Gisbert Fanselow, Caroline Féry, Ralf Vogel, and Matthias Schlesewsky (eds), Gradience in grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 291–316.Find this resource:

Farkas, Donka (2009). Polarity particles in Hungarian, in Marcel den Dikken and Robert Vago (eds), Approaches to Hungarian 11. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 95–118.Find this resource:

Farkas, Donka and Floris Roelofsen (forthcoming). Polar initiatives and polarity particle responses in an inquisitive discourse model. Language. Accepted subject to minor revisions.Find this resource:

Farudi, Annahita (2013). Gapping in Farsi: A cross-linguistic investigation. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Find this resource:

Fernández, Raquel (2006). Non-sentential utterances in dialogue: Classification, resolution and use. PhD thesis, King’s College.Find this resource:

Fernández, Raquel and Jonathan Ginzburg (2002). Non-sentential utterances: A corpus study, Traitement automatique des languages 43(2): 13–42.Find this resource:

Fernández, Raquel, Jonathan Ginzburg, and Shalom Lappin (2004). Classifying ellipsis in dialogue: A machine learning approach, in COLING’04: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 240–6.Find this resource:

Fernández, Raquel, Jonathan Ginzburg, and Shalom Lappin (2007). Classifying non-sentential utterances in dialogue: A machine learning approach, Computational Linguistics 33(3): 397–427.Find this resource:

(p. 1058) Ferrara, Lindsay and Trevor Johnston (2014). Elaborating who’s what: A study of constructed action and clause structure in Auslan (Australian Sign Language), Australian Journal of Linguistics 34: 193–215.Find this resource:

Féry, Caroline (1994). Prosodische und tonale Faktoren bei der Disambiguierung syntaktischer Strukturen, in Karl H. Ramers, Heinz Vater, and Henning Wode (eds), Universale phonologische Strukturen und Prozesse. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 97–114.Find this resource:

Féry, Caroline and Katharina Hartmann (2005). The focus and prosodic structure of German Right Node Raising and gapping, The Linguistic Review 22(1): 69–116.Find this resource:

Féry, Caroline and Shinichiro Ishihara (eds) (2016). The Oxford Handbook of Information Structure. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Fiengo, Robert (1980). Surface structure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Fiengo, Robert and Robert May (1994). Indices and identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Fillmore, Charles (1969). Types of lexical information, in Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Studies in syntax and semantics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 109–37.Find this resource:

Fillmore, Charles (1986). Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora, in Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 95–107.Find this resource:

Fillmore, Charles, Paul Kay, and Mary Catherine O’Connor (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of ‘let alone’, Language 64(3): 501–38.Find this resource:

Filtopoulos, Rebecca (2015). Dialogical analysis of theatre: A corpus study of non-sentential utterances in Waiting for Godot and Endgame. Master’s thesis, Université Paris Diderot.Find this resource:

von Fintel, Kai (1999). NPI licensing, Strawson entailment and context dependency, Journal of Semantics 16(2): 97–148.Find this resource:

Fischer, Klaus (1997). German-English verb valency: A contrastive analysis. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Find this resource:

Fitzpatrick, Justin M. (2006). Deletion through movement, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24(2): 399–431.Find this resource:

Fletcher, Charles (1994). Levels of representation in memory for discourse, in Morton Ann Gernsbacher (ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. San Diego: Academic Press, 589–607.Find this resource:

Fodor, Janet Dean and Ivan Sag (1982). Referential and quantificational indefinites, Linguistics and Philosophy 5: 355–98.Find this resource:

Fodor, Jerry A., Thomas G. Bever, and Merrill F. Garrett (1974). The psychobiology of language. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishers.Find this resource:

Foley, Claire, Zelmira Núñez del Prado, Isabella Barbier, and Barbara Lust (2003). Knowledge of variable binding in VP-ellipsis: Language acquisition research and theory converge, Syntax 6(1): 52–83.Find this resource:

Folli, Raffaella, Heidi Harley, and Simin Karimi (2005). Determinants of event type in Persian complex predicates, Lingua 115: 1365–1401.Find this resource:

Fortin, Catherine (2007a). Some (not all) nonsententials are only a phase, Lingua 117(1): 67–94.Find this resource:

Fortin, Catherine (2007b). Indonesian sluicing and verb phrase ellipsis: Description and explanation in the Minimalist framework. PhD thesis, University of Michigan.Find this resource:

Fortin, Catherine (2011). We need LF-copying: A few good reasons why, in Mary Byram Washburn, Sarah Ouwayda, Chuoying Ouyang, Bin Yin, Canan Ipek, Lisa Marston, and Aaron Walker (eds), Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 87–95.Find this resource:

Fortin, Catherine (2013). Indonesian sluicing is LF copying. Ms. Carleton College.Find this resource:

Fortin, Catherine (2014). The distribution of [E]: A view from Indonesian verb phrase ellipsis, in Joseph Sabbagh (ed.), Proceedings of the 20th Meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association (AFLA 20). London: University of Western Ontario.Find this resource:

Fox, Danny (1995). Economy and scope, Natural Language Semantics 3(3): 283–341.Find this resource:

Fox, Danny (1999). Reconstruction, binding theory, and the interpretation of chains, Linguistic Inquiry 30(2): 157–96.Find this resource:

(p. 1059) Fox, Danny (2000). Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Fox, Danny (2002). Antecedent-contained deletion and the copy theory of movement, Linguistic Inquiry 33(1): 63–96.Find this resource:

Fox, Danny and Howard Lasnik (2003). Successive-cyclic movement and island repair: The difference between sluicing and VP-ellipsis, Linguistic Inquiry 34(1): 143–54.Find this resource:

Fox, Danny, and John Nissenbaum (1999). Extraposition and scope: A case for overt QR. Paper presented at WCCFL 18: The 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics.Find this resource:

Fraser, Bruce (1970). Vice versa, Linguistic Inquiry 1(2): 277–8.Find this resource:

Frauenfelder, Uli and Caroline Floccia (2006). Das Erkennen gesprochener Wörter, in Angela D. Friederici (ed.), Sprachrezeption. Göttingen: Hofgrefe, 1–48.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn (2008). Processing ellipsis: A processing solution to the undergeneration problem? in Charles B. Chang and Hannah J. Haynie (eds), Proceedings of the 26th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 21–32.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn (2015). Two interpretive systems for natural language? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 44(1): 7–25.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton, Jr (1998). Comprehension of sluiced sentences, Language and Cognitive Processes 13: 499–520.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton, Jr (2000). On bound-variable interpretations: The LF-only hypothesis, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29: 125–39.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton, Jr (2001). Parsing coordinates and ellipsis: Copy a, Syntax 4(1): 1–22.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton, Jr (2005). The syntax-discourse divide: Processing ellipsis, Syntax 8(2): 121–74.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton Jr (2006). Ellipsis and discourse coherence, Linguistics and Philosophy 35: 315–46.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton Jr (2011). Dynamic interpretations: Finding an antecedent for VPE, in Jesse A. Harris and Margaret Grant (eds), University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics: Processing linguistic structure. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 21–35.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn and Charles Clifton Jr (2015). Without his shirt off he saved the child from almost drowning: Intepreting uncertain input, Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 30(6): 635–47.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn, Charles Clifton Jr, and Katy Carlson (2007). Focus and VP ellipsis, Language and Speech 50: 1–21.Find this resource:

Frazier, Lyn, Lori Taft, Tom Roeper, Charles Clifton Jr, and Kate Erlich (1984). Parallel structure: A source of facilitation in sentence comprehension, Memory and Cognition 12: 421–30.Find this resource:

Frederking, Robert E. (1993). Understanding dialogue ellipsis. Pittsburgh: Center for Machine Translation, Carnegie Mellon University.Find this resource:

Fried, Mirjam (2009). Construction grammar as a tool for diachronic analysis, Constructions and Frames 1(2): 262–91.Find this resource:

Friederici, Angela D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6: 78–84.Find this resource:

Friedman, Lynn (1976). The manifestation of subject, object and topic in American Sign Language, in Charles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press, 125–48.Find this resource:

Fu, Jingqi, Tom Roeper, and Hagit Borer (2001). The VP within process nominals: Evidence from adverbs and the VP anaphor do so, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19(3): 549–82.Find this resource:

Fukaya, Teruhiko (2003). Island (in)sensitivity in Japanese sluicing and stripping, in Gina Garding and Mimu Tsujimura (eds), Proceedings from the 22th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 179–92.Find this resource:

Fukaya, Teruhiko (2007). Sluicing and stripping in Japanese and some implications. PhD thesis, USC.Find this resource:

Fukaya, Teruhiko (2012). Island-sensitivity in Japanese sluicing and some implications, in Jason Merchant and Andrew Simpson (eds), Sluicing: Cross-linguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 123–63.Find this resource:

(p. 1060) Fukaya, Teruhiko and Hajime Hoji (1999). Stripping and sluicing in Japanese and some implications, in S. Bird, A. Carnie, J. Haugen, and P. Norquest (eds), Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 145–58.Find this resource:

Fukui, Naoki (1986). A theory of category projection and its application. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Find this resource:

Fukui, Naoki and Margaret Speas (1986). Specifiers and projection, in Naoki Fukui, Tova R. Rapoport, and Elizabeth Sagey (eds), Papers in theoretical linguistics: MIT working papers in linguistics 8. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 128–72.Find this resource:

Funakoshi, Kenshi (2012). On headless XP-movement/ellipsis, Linguistic Inquiry 43: 519–62.Find this resource:

Funakoshi, Kenshi (2014). Syntactic head movement and its consequences. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.Find this resource:

Funakoshi, Kenshi (2016). Verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis in Japanese, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 25: 113–42.Find this resource:

Gagnon, Michaël (2013a). Anaphors and the missing link. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.Find this resource:

Gagnon, Michaël (2013b). Part and parcel of eliding partitives, SALT 23: Proceedings of the 23rd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 316–35.Find this resource:

Gajewski, Jon (2002). L-analyticity and natural language. Ms. MIT.Find this resource:

Gärdenfors, Peter (2014). The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Gardent, Claire (1991). Gapping and VP ellipsis in a unification-based grammar. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.Find this resource:

Gardent, Claire and Michael Kohlhase (1996). Higher-order coloured unification and natural language semantics, in Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting on Association of Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1–9.Find this resource:

Gardent, Claire and Michael Kohlhase (1997). Computing parallelism in discourse, IJCAI97: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1016–21.Find this resource:

Gardent, Claire and Michael Kohlhase (1998). Higher-order colored unification: A linguistic application, Technique et Science Informatique 18: 181–209.Find this resource:

Gargett, Andrew, Eleni Gregoromichelaki, Chris Howes, and Yo Sato (2008). Dialogue-grammar correspondence in Dynamic Syntax, in Jonathan Ginzburg, Pat Healey, and Yo Sato (eds), Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SEMDIAL), 37–44.Find this resource:

Gargett, Andrew, Eleni Gregoromichelaki, Ruth Kempson, Matthew Purver, and Yo Sato (2009). Grammar resources for modeling dialogue dynamically, Cognitive Neurodynamics 3(4): 347–63.Find this resource:

Gawron, Jean Mark (1995). Comparatives, superlatives, and resolution, Linguistics and Philosophy 18(4): 333–80.Find this resource:

Gawron, Jean Mark and Andrew Kehler (2004). The semantics of respective readings, conjunction, and filler-gap dependencies, Linguistics and Philosophy 27(2): 169–207.Find this resource:

Gawron, Jean Mark and Stanley Peters (1990). Anaphora and quantification in situation semantics. Stanford University: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Find this resource:

van Gelderen, Elly and Jeff MacSwan (2008). Interface conditions and code-switching: Pronouns, lexical DPs, and checking theory, Lingua 118(6): 765–76.Find this resource:

Gengel, Kirsten (2007). Focus and ellipsis: A generative analysis of pseudogapping and other elliptical structures. PhD thesis, University of Stuttgart.Find this resource:

Gengel, Kirsten (2013). Pseudogapping and ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Gennari, Silvia P. and Maryellen C. MacDonald (2006). Acquisition of negation and quantification: Insights from adult production and comprehension, Language Acquisition 13(2): 125–68.Find this resource:

Gergel, Remus (2004). Short-distance reanalysis of Middle English modals: Evidence from ellipsis, Studia Linguistica 58(2): 53–87.Find this resource:

(p. 1061) Gergel, Remus (2006). Interpretable features in vP-ellipsis: On the licensing head, in S. Blaho, E. Schoorlemmer, and L. Vicente (eds), Proceedings of ConSOLE XIV. Leiden: SOLE, 165–88.Find this resource:

Gergel, Remus (2009). Modality and ellipsis: Diachronic and synchronic evidence. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Gergel, Remus, Kirsten Gengel, and Susanne Winkler (2007). Ellipsis and inversion: A feature-based account, in Kerstin Schwabe and Susanne Winkler (eds), On information structure, meaning and form. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 301–22.Find this resource:

Ghaniabadi, Saeed (2010). The empty noun construction in Persian. PhD thesis, University of Manitoba.Find this resource:

Giannakidou, Anastasia and Jason Merchant (1998). Reverse sluicing in English and Greek, The Linguistic Review 15: 233–56.Find this resource:

Giannakidou, Anastasia and Melita Stavrou (1999). Nominalization and ellipsis in the Greek DP, The Linguistic Review 16: 295–331.Find this resource:

Gibson, Edward, Pauline Jacobson, Peter Graff, Kyle Mahowald, Evelina Fedorenko, and Steven T. Piantadosi (2015). A pragmatic account of complexity in definite antecedent-contained-deletion relative clauses, Journal of Semantics 32(4): 579–618.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan (1992). Questions, queries and facts: A semantics and pragmatics for interrogatives. PhD thesis, Stanford University, Stanford.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan (1994). An update semantics for dialogue, in Harry Bunt (ed.), Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Linguistics. Tilburg: ITK.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan (1995). Resolving questions, I, Linguistics and Philosophy 18(5): 459–527.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan (1999). Semantically-based ellipsis resolution with syntactic presuppositions, in Harry Bunt and Reinhard Muskens (eds), Computing meaning. Springer, 255–79.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan (2012). The interactive stance: Meaning for conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan and Robin Cooper (2004). Clarification, ellipsis, and the nature of contextual updates in dialogue, Linguistics and Philosophy 27(3): 297–365.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan and Robin Cooper (2014). Quotation via dialogical interaction, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 23(3): 287–311.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan, Robin Cooper, and Tim Fernando (2014a). Propositions, questions, and adjectives: A rich type-theoretic approach, in Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Type Theory and Natural Language Semantics (TTNLS). Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics, 89–96.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan, Robin Cooper, Julian Hough, and David Schlangen (2017). Incrementality and clarification/sluicing potential, in Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 21. Edinburgh.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan and Raquel Fernández (2010). Computational models of dialogue, in Alex Clark, Chris Fox, and Shalom Lappin (eds), Handbook of computational linguistics and natural language processing. Oxford: Blackwell, 429–81.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan, Raquel Fernández, and David Schlangen (2014b). Disfluencies as intra-utterance dialogue moves, Semantics and Pragmatics 7(9): 1–64.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan and Dimitra Kolliakou (2009). Answers without questions: The emergence of fragments in child language, Journal of Linguistics 45: 641–73.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan and Massimo Poesio (2016). Grammar is a system that characterizes talk in interaction, Frontiers in Psychology 7: 1–22.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan and Ivan Sag (2000). Interrogative investigations. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Find this resource:

Gleitman, Lila (1965). Coordinating conjunctions in English, Language 41: 260–93.Find this resource:

Göksun, Tilbe, Tom Roeper, Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, and Roberta M. Golinkoff (2011). From noun phrase ellipsis to verb phrase ellipsis: The acquisition path from context to abstract reconstruction, in Jassie A. Harris and Margaret Grant (eds), Processing linguistic structure. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 53–74.Find this resource:

(p. 1062) Goldberg, Adele E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Adele E. (2002). Surface generalizations: An alternative to derivations, Cognitive Linguistics 4: 327–56.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Adele E. (2013). Backgrounded constituents cannot be ‘extracted’, in Jon Sprouse and Norbert Hornstein (eds), Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 221–38.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Lotus Madelyn (2005). Verb stranding VP-ellipsis: A cross-linguistic study. PhD thesis, McGill University.Find this resource:

Goldsmith, John (1985). A principled exception to the Coordinate Structure Constraint, in William H. Eilfort, Paul D. Kroeber, and Karen L. Peterson (eds), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 133–43.Find this resource:

Goldsmith, John (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay (2005). Die Syntax des Code-Switching. PhD thesis, University of Cologne.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay, Laura Bartlett, Sarah Downey, Shane Ebert, Jeanne Heil, Brad Hoot, Bryan Koronkiewicz, and Sergio Ramos (2013). Methodological considerations in code-switching research, Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 6(1): 119–38.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay and Bryan Koronkiewicz (2016). Tú y yo can codeswitch, nosotros cannot: Pronouns in Spanish-English codeswitching, in Rosa E. Guzzardo Tamargo, Catherine M. Mazak, and M. Carmen Parafita Couto (eds), Spanish-English codeswitching in the Caribbean and the US. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 237–60.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay and Luis López (2011). Some properties of light verbs in codeswitching, Lingua 121(5): 832–50.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay and Luis López (2012). Little v and parametric variation, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30(1): 33–77.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay and Sergio Ramos (2014). A morphosyntactic condition on sluicing: Evidence from Spanish/German code-switching. Ms. University of Illinois at Chicago.Find this resource:

González-Vilbazo, Kay and Volker Struckmeier (2008). Asymmetrien im code-switching: Eine DM-Lösung zur Partizipselektion, in Eva-Maria Remberger and Guido Menshing (eds), Romanistische Sprachwissenschaft–minimalistisch. Tübingen: Narr Verlag, 83–102.Find this resource:

Goodall, Grant (1987). Parallel structures in syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Goodglass, Harold and Edith Kaplan (1972). The assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.Find this resource:

Gračanin-Yüksek, Martina (2007). About sharing. PhD thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Grant, Margaret (2012). The parsing and interpretation of comparatives: More than meets the eye. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Find this resource:

Grant, Margaret, Charles Clifton Jr, and Lyn Frazier (2012). The role of non-actuality implicatures in processing elided constituents, Journal of Memory and Language 66(1): 326–43.Find this resource:

Grebenyova, Lydia (2004). Interpretation of Slavic multiple wh-questions, in Proceedings of the Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 12.Find this resource:

Grebenyova, Lydia (2006a). Multiple interrogatives: Syntax, semantics, and learnability. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.Find this resource:

Grebenyova, Lydia (2006b). Multiple left branch extraction under sluicing, in Proceedings of the 41st Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Find this resource:

Grebenyova, Lydia (2006c). Sluicing puzzles in Russian, in Hana Filip, Steven Franks, James Lavine, and Mila Tasseva-Kurktchieva (eds), Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The Princeton meeting. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, 156–70.Find this resource:

Grebenyova, Lydia (2007). Sluicing in Slavic, Journal of Slavic Linguistics 15(1): 49–80.Find this resource:

Grebenyova, Lydia (2009). Sluicing and multiple wh-fronting, in Nguyen Chi Duy Khuong and Richa Samar Sinha (eds), Proceedings of GLOW in Asia 5. New Delhi: Central Institute of Indian Languages, 219–42.Find this resource:

(p. 1063) Grebenyova, Lydia (2012). Syntax, semantics and acquisition of multiple interrogatives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Green, Lisa (2000). Aspectual BE-type constructions and coercion in African American English, Natural Language Semantics 8(1): 1–25.Find this resource:

Green, Lisa (2002). African American English: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Green, Lisa (2011). Language and the African American child. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni (2006). Conditionals: A Dynamic Syntax account. PhD thesis, King’s College London.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni (2012). Review of J. Ginzburg (2012), The interactive stance, Folia Linguistica 47: 293–316.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni (2013). Clitic left dislocation and clitic doubling: A dynamic perspective on left-right asymmetries in Greek, in Gert Webelhuth, Manfred Sailer, and Heike Walker (eds), Rightward movement in a comparative perspective. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 321–68.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni (2016). The case of non-sentential speech. Ms. University of Osnabrueck.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni (2017). Quotation in dialogue, in Paul Saka and Michael Johnson (eds), Semantic and pragmatic aspects of quotation. Berlin: Springer, 195–255.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni, Ronnie Cann, and Ruth Kempson (2013). On coordination in dialogue: Subsentential talk and its implications, in Laurence Goldstein (ed.), On brevity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 53–73.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni, Ruth Kempson, Matthew Purver, Greg J. Mills, Ronnie Cann, Wilfried Meyer-Viol, and Pat G. T. Healey (2011). Incrementality and intention-recognition in utterance processing, Dialogue and Discourse 2(1): 199–233.Find this resource:

Gregoromichelaki, Eleni, Yo Sato, Ruth Kempson, Andrew Gargett, and Christine Howes (2009). Dialogue modelling and the remit of core grammar, in Harry Bunt, Volha Petukhova, and Sander Wubben (eds), Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Computational Semantics (IWCS-8). Tilburg, 128–39.Find this resource:

Gregory, Howard and Shalom Lappin (1999). Antecedent contained ellipsis in HPSG, in Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre Koenig, and Andreas Kathol (eds), Lexical and constructional aspects of linguistic explanation. Stanford: CSLI, 331–56.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2008). Exposing the Russian verbal complex via evidence from prefixation and verb phrase ellipsis. Paper presented at the 17th Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, Yale University.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2009a). Ellipsis and the syntax of verbs in Russian. Talk given at NYU.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2009b). Prefixation, verb phrase ellipsis and the structure of the Russian verbal complex. Ms. UCSC.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2009c). Structural adjacency and the typology of interrogative interpretations, Linguistic Inquiry 40(1): 133–54.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2010). On diagnosing ellipsis and argument drop: The view from Russian. Talk given at MIT.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2013a). A new argument for verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis, Linguistic Inquiry 44(1): 145–57.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2013b). Verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis and the structure of the Russian verbal complex, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31(1): 91–136.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera (2013c). Copular clauses, clefts, and putative sluicing in Uzbek, Language 89: 830–82.Find this resource:

Gribanova, Vera and Emily Manetta (2016). Ellipsis in wh-in-situ languages: Deriving apparent sluicing in Hindi-Urdu and Uzbek, Linguistic Inquiry 47(4): 631–68.Find this resource:

Grice, Martine, Stefan Baumann, and Ralf Benzmüller (2005). German intonation in autosegmental-metrical phonology, in Sun-Ah Jun (ed.), Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 55–83.Find this resource:

Grice, Paul (1975). Logic and conversation, in Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3. New York: Academic Press, 22–40.Find this resource:

(p. 1064) Griffiths, James (2015). On appositives. PhD thesis, University of Groningen.Find this resource:

Griffiths, James and Anikó Lipták (2014). Contrast and island sensitivity in clausal ellipsis, Syntax 17: 189–234.Find this resource:

Grimshaw, Jane (1979). Complement selection and the lexicon, Linguistic Inquiry 10: 279–326.Find this resource:

Grimshaw, Jane (1991). Extended projection. Unpublished manuscript, Brandeis University.Find this resource:

Grinder, John and Paul M. Postal (1971). Missing antecedents, Linguistic Inquiry 2(3): 269–312.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef (1984). Language deficits and linguistic theory. PhD thesis, Brandeis University.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef (1986). Language deficits and the theory of syntax, Brain and Language 27: 135–59.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef (2000). The neurology of syntax, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23: 1–71.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef (2005). Ellipsis in deficient language users: Parallels (and divergences) in parallelism. Plenary talk, Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition (GALA), Siena.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef (2011). Two puzzles in experimental syntax and semantics, in Proceedings of the 47th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 41–64.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef and Tanya Reinhart (1993). The innateness of binding and coreference, Linguistic Inquiry 24(1): 69–102.Find this resource:

Grodzinsky, Yosef and Andrea Santi (2008). The battle for Broca’s region, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 12(12): 474–80.Find this resource:

Groenendijk, Jeroen (2007). Inquisitive Semantics: Two possibilities for disjunction, in Peter Bosch, David Gabelaia, and Jérôme Lang (eds), Logic, language, and computation. Heidelberg: Springer, 80–94.Find this resource:

Groenendijk, Jeroen (2011). Erotetic languages and the inquisitive hierarchy, in J. van der Does and C. Dutilh Novaes (eds), This is not a Festschrift: A Festschrift for Martin Stokhof (online).Find this resource:

Groenendijk, Jeroen and Floris Roelofsen (2009). Inquisitive semantics and pragmatics, in Jesús M. Larrazabal and Larraitz Zubeldia (eds), SPR-09: Proceedings of the ILCLI International Workshop on Semantics, Pragmatics and Rhetoric. San Sebastián: Universidad del País Vasco.Find this resource:

Groenendijk, Jeroen and Martin Stokhof (1984). The semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Find this resource:

Grootveld, Marjan Jeannette (1984). Parsing coordination generatively. PhD thesis, Leiden University.Find this resource:

Grosjean, François (1982). Life with two languages: An introduction to bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Grosjean, François (1998). Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1(2): 131–49.Find this resource:

Groß, Thomas (1999). Theoretical foundations of dependency syntax. Munich: Ludicium.Find this resource:

Groß, Thomas and Timothy Osborne (2009). Toward a practical DG theory of discontinuities, SKY Journal of Linguistics 22: 43–90.Find this resource:

Groß, Thomas and Timothy Osborne (2013). Katena und Konstruktion: Ein Vorschlag zu einer dependen-ziellen Konstruktionsgrammatik, Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 32(1): 41–73.Find this resource:

Grosu, Alexander (1973). On the nonunitary nature of the Coordinate Structure Constraint, Linguistic Inquiry 4(1): 88–92.Find this resource:

Grosu, Alexander (1985). Subcategorization and parallelism, Theoretical Linguistics 12: 231–9.Find this resource:

Grosu, Alexander (1987). On acceptable violations of parallelism constraints, in René Dirven and Vilém Fried (eds), Functionalism in linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 425–57.Find this resource:

Grosu, Alexander (1994). Three studies in locality and case. London: Routledge.Find this resource:

Grosz, Barbara, Aravind Joshi, and Scott Weinstein (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse, Computational Linguistics 21: 203–26.Find this resource:

Grosz, Patrick (2015). Movement and agreement in Right-Node Raising constructions, Syntax 18: 1–38.Find this resource:

Grover, Claire, Chris Brew, Suresh Manandhar, Marc Moens, and Andreas Schöter (1995). Priority union and generalization in discourse grammar, Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science 10: 157–96.Find this resource:

(p. 1065) Gualmini, Andrea, Sarah Hulsey, Valentine Hacquard, and Danny Fox (2004). The question-answer requirement for scope assignment, Natural Language Semantics 16: 205–37.Find this resource:

Guasti, Maria Teresa (2002). Language acquisition: The growth of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Guida, Flore (2013). Les phrases sans verbes. Ms. Université Paris-Diderot.Find this resource:

Gullifer, Jason (2004). Processing reverse sluicing: A contrast with processing filler-gap dependences, in Keir Moulton and Matthew Wolf (eds), NELS 34: Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 1–20.Find this resource:

Gumperz, John (1976). The sociolinguistic significance of conversational code-switching. Papers on language and context, Working paper 46, University of California, Berkeley, 1–46.Find this resource:

Gundel, Jeanette, Nancy Hedberg, and Zacharski (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse, Language 69(2): 274–307.Find this resource:

Guthrie, Malcolm (1967). Comparative Bantu: An introduction to the comparative linguistics and prehistory of the Bantu languages. Farnborough: Gregg Press.Find this resource:

Gyuris, Béata (2001). Semantic licensing of VP-ellipsis, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 48(1–3): 59–78.Find this resource:

Ha, Seungwan (2008a). Contrastive focus: Licensor for Right Node Raising, in Emily Elfner and Martin Walkow (eds), NELS 37: Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 247–60.Find this resource:

Ha, Seungwan (2008b). Ellipsis, Right Node Raising, and across-the-board constructions. PhD thesis, Boston University.Find this resource:

Ha, Seungwan (2008c). On ellipsis features and Right Node Raising, in Proceedings of ConSOLE XV. Leiden: SOLE, 67–90.Find this resource:

Hackl, Martin, Jorie Koster-Hale, and Jason Varvoutis (2012). Quantification and ACD: Evidence from real time sentence processing, Journal of Semantics 29: 145–206.Find this resource:

Haddican, Bill (2007). On egin: do-support and VP focus in Central and Western Basque, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25(4): 735–64.Find this resource:

Haddican, Bill (2008). The structural deficiency of verbal pro-forms, Linguistic Inquiry 38(3): 539–47.Find this resource:

Haeseryn, W., K. Romijn, G. Geerts, J. de Rooij, and M. C. van den Toorn (eds) (1997). Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen / Deurne: Martinus Nijhoff / Wolters Plantyn.Find this resource:

Haida, Andreas (2008). The indefiniteness and focusing of wh-words. PhD thesis, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.Find this resource:

Haïk, Isabelle (1984). Indirect binding, Linguistic Inquiry 15(2): 185–224.Find this resource:

Haïk, Isabelle (1987). Bound VPs that need to be, Linguistics and Philosophy 10(4): 503–30.Find this resource:

Halliday, Michael (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 2, Journal of Linguistics 3: 199–244.Find this resource:

Hallman, Peter (2004). Symmetry in structure building, Syntax 7(1): 79–100.Find this resource:

Halpert, Claire (2012). Argument licensing and agreement in Zulu. PhD thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Halpert, Claire (2015). Argument licensing and agreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hamblin, Charles (1973). Questions in Montague grammar, Foundations of Language 10(1): 41–53.Find this resource:

Hankamer, Jorge (1971). Constraints on deletion in syntax. PhD thesis, Yale University.Find this resource:

Hankamer, Jorge (1973a). Unacceptable ambiguity, Linguistic Inquiry 4(1): 17–68.Find this resource:

Hankamer, Jorge (1973b). Why there are two than’s in English, in Claudia Corum, T. Cedric Smith-Stark, and Ann Weiser (eds), Proceedings of the 8th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 179–91.Find this resource:

Hankamer, Jorge (1978). On the nontransformational derivation of some null VP anaphors, Linguistic Inquiry 9(1): 66–74.Find this resource:

Hankamer, Jorge (1979). Deletion in coordinate structures. New York: Garland Publishing.Find this resource:

Hankamer, Jorge and Ivan Sag (1976). Deep and surface anaphora, Linguistic Inquiry 7(3): 391–428.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1990). A corpus-based survey of VP ellipsis. Ms. University of Pennsylvania.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1992a). An algorithm for VP ellipsis, in Proceedings of the 30th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 9–14.Find this resource:

(p. 1066) Hardt, Daniel (1992b). VP ellipsis and contextual interpretation, in COLING-92: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 303–9.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1992c). VP ellipsis and semantic identity, in Chris Barker and David Dowty (eds), SALT 2: Proceedings of the 2nd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 145–62.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1993). Verb phrase ellipsis: Form, meaning and processing. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1994). Sense and reference in dynamic semantics, in P. J. E. Dekker and M. J. B. Stockhof (eds) Proceedings of the 9th Amsterdam Colloquium. Amsterdam: ILLC, 333–48.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1997a). An empirical approach to VP ellipsis, Computational Linguistics 23(4): 525–41.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1997b). VPE as a proform: Some consequences for binding. Paper presented at the 2nd Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris (CSSP).Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel (1999). Dynamic interpretation of verb phrase ellipsis, Linguistics and Philosophy 22(2): 185–219.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel and Owen Rambow (2001). Generation of VP ellipsis: A corpus-based approach, in Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 290–7.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel and Maribel Romero (2004). Ellipsis and the structure of discourse, Journal of Semantics 21(4): 375–414.Find this resource:

Hardt, Daniel, Nicholas Asher, and Julie Hunter (2013). VP ellipsis without indices, in SALT 23: Proceedings of the 23rd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference, Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 239–56.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi (2005). One-replacement, unaccusativity, acategorial roots, and bare phrase structure, in Slava Gorbachov and Andrew Nevins (eds), Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 11. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 59–78.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi (2009). Compounding in Distributed Morphology, in Rochelle Lieber and Pavel Stekauer (eds), Oxford Handbook of Compounding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 129–44.Find this resource:

Harris, Jesse (2016). Processing ‘let alone’ coordination in silent reading, Lingua 169: 70–94.Find this resource:

Harris, Jesse and Katy Carlson (2016). Keep it local (and final): Remnant preferences for ‘let alone’ ellipsis, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 69(7): 1278–1301.Find this resource:

Hartman, Jeremy (2007). Focus, deletion, and identity: Investigations of ellipsis in English. BA thesis, Harvard University.Find this resource:

Hartman, Jeremy and Ruizi Ressi Ai (2009). A focus account of swiping, in Kleanthes K. Grohmann and Phoevos Panagiotidis (eds), Selected papers from the 2006 Cyprus Syntaxfest. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 91–122.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Katharina (1998). Right Node Raising and gapping. PhD thesis, Goethe-Universität zu Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Katharina (2000). Right Node Raising and gapping: Interface conditions on prosodic deletion. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Katharina (2003). Background matching in Right Node Raising constructions, in Kerstin Schwabe and Susanne Winkler (eds), The interfaces: Deriving and interpreting omitted structures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 121–51.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Katharina (2009). Right node raising and gapping: Interface conditions on prosodic deletion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Katharina and Viola Schmitt (2013). Violations of the Right Edge Constraint in Right Node Raising, Snippets 27: 8–10.Find this resource:

Harves, Stephanie (2002). Genitive of negation and the syntax of scope, in Marjo van Koppen, Erica Thrift, Erik-Jan van der Torre, and Malte Zimmerman (eds), Proceedings of ConSOLE IX. Leiden: SOLE, 96–110.Find this resource:

(p. 1067) Harwood, Will (2013). Being progressive is just a phase: Dividing the functional hierarchy. PhD thesis, Ghent University.Find this resource:

Harwood, Will (2014). Being progressive is just a phase: Celebrating the uniqueness of progressive aspect under a phase-based analysis, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 33: 523–73.Find this resource:

Hasegawa, Nobuko (1984/5). On the so-called ‘empty pronouns’ in Japanese, The Linguistic Review 4: 289–341.Find this resource:

Hasegawa, Nobuko (2008). Wh-movement in Japanese: Matrix sluicing is different from embedded sluicing, in Cedric Boeckx and Suleyman Ulutas (eds), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 55: Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Formal Altaic Linguistics (WAFL-4). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, 63–74.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin (1997). Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin (2007a). Coordination, in Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Complex constructions, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–51.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin (2007b). Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology, Linguistic Typology 11: 119–32.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin (2008). Parametric versus functional explanations of syntactic universals, in T. Biberauer (ed.), The Limits of Syntactic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 75–107.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin (2010). Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies, Language 86: 663–87.Find this resource:

Hausser, Roland and Dietmar Zaefferer (1979). Questions and answers in a context dependent Montague grammar, in Franz Guenther and Max Schmidt (eds), Formal semantics and pragmatics for natural languages. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 339–58.Find this resource:

Hawkins, John A. (2004). Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hawkins, John A. (2014). Cross-linguistic variation and efficiency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hayashi, Shintaro (2015). Head movement in an agglutinative SOV language. PhD thesis, Yokohama National University.Find this resource:

Haynie, Hannah J. (2010). What is Null Complement Anaphora? A syntactic account can explain. Ms. University of California at Berkeley.Find this resource:

van der Heijden, Emmeken (1999). Tussen nevenschikking en onderschikking: een onderzoek naar verschillende vormen van verbinding in het Nederlands. PhD thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.Find this resource:

van der Heijden, Emmeken and Maarten Klein (1995). Rekenkundige voegwoorden: De ‘logica’ van samentrekkingen, De Nieuwe Taalgids 88: 22–38.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene (1985). Notes on comparatives and related matters. Unpublished manuscript, University of Texas-Austin.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene (1998). Anaphora and semantic interpretation: A reinterpretation of Reinhart’s approach, in Orin Percus and Uli Sauerland (eds), The interpretive tract. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 205–46.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene (2000). Degree operators and scope, in Brendan Jackson and Tanya Matthews (eds), SALT 10: Proceedings of the 10th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 40–64.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene (2006). Remarks on comparative clauses as generalized quantifiers. Ms. MIT.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene (2009). Forks on the road to Rule I, in Muhammad Abdurrahman, Anisa Schardi, and Martin Walkow (eds), NELS 38: Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 256–84.Find this resource:

Heim, Irene and Angelika Kratzer (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Heine, Lena (2011). Non-coordination-based ellipsis from a Construction Grammar perspective: The case of the coffee construction, Cognitive Linguistics 22(1): 55–80.Find this resource:

(p. 1068) Hendriks, Petra (1991). The coordination-like structure of comparatives, in Frank Drijkoningen and Ans van Kemenade (eds), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1991. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 41–50.Find this resource:

Hendriks, Petra (1995). Comparatives and categorial grammar. PhD thesis, University of Groningen.Find this resource:

Hendriks, Petra (2004). Coherence relations, ellipsis and contrastive topics, Journal of Semantics 21: 375–414.Find this resource:

Hendriks, Petra and Jennifer Spenader (2005). Why be silent? Some functions of ellipsis in natural language, in Jennifer Spenader and Petra Hendriks (eds), Proceedings of the Cross-modular approaches to ellipsis (ESSLLI), 29–38.Find this resource:

Hennig, Mathilde (ed.) (2013). Die Ellipse: Neue Perspektive auf ein altes Phänomen. Berlin: De Gruyter.Find this resource:

Heringer, Hans (1996). Deutsche Syntax dependentiell. Tübingen: Stauffenberg.Find this resource:

Hernández, Ana Carrera (2007). Gapping as a syntactic dependency, Lingua 117(12): 2106–33.Find this resource:

Hernanz, María Luisa and José María Brucart (1987). La sintaxis I. Barcelona: Crítica.Find this resource:

Hestvik, Arild (1995). Reflexives and ellipsis. Natural Langauge Semantics 3(2): 211–37.Find this resource:

Herring, Jon, M. Carmen Parafita Couto, Moro Quintanilla, and Mónica Moro Quintanilla (2010). ‘When I went to Canada, I saw the madre’: Evaluating two theories’ predictions about codeswitching between determiners and nouns using Spanish-English and Welsh-English bilingual corpora, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 13(5): 553–73.Find this resource:

Heycock, Caroline and Anthony Kroch (1994). Verb movement and coordination in a dynamic theory of licensing, The Linguistic Review 11(3–4): 257–84.Find this resource:

Hilbert, David and Paul Bernays (1939). Grundlagen der Mathematik II. Berlin: Julius Springer.Find this resource:

Hinds, John (1973). On the status of the VP node in Japanese, Language Research 9: 44–57.Find this resource:

Hiraiwa, Ken and Shinichiro Ishihara (2002). Missing links: Clefts, sluicing and ‘no da’ construction in Japanese, in Tania Ionin, Heejeong Ko, and Andrew Nevins (eds), The MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 43: Proceedings of the 2nd HUMIT Student Conference in Language Research (HUMIT 2001). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, 35–54.Find this resource:

Hiraiwa, Ken and Shinichiro Ishihara (2012). Syntactic metamorphosis: Clefts, sluicings, and in-situ focus in Japanese, Syntax 15(2): 142–80.Find this resource:

Hirsch, Aron (2016). A case for conjunction reduction. Ms. MIT.Find this resource:

Hirsch, Aron and Michael Wagner (2015). Right Node Raising, scope, and plurality, in Thomas Brochhagen, Floris Roelofsen and Nadine Theiler (eds), Proceedings of the 20th Amsterdam Colloquium. Amsterdam: ILLC, 187–96.Find this resource:

Hirschberg, Julia (2004). Pragmatics and intonation, in Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 515–37.Find this resource:

Hirschberg, Julia and Gregory Ward (1991). Accent and bound anaphora, Cognitive Linguistics 2(2): 101–21.Find this resource:

Hirschbuhler, Paul (1982). VP deletion and across-the-board quantifier scope, in James Pustejovsky and Peter Sells (eds), NELS 12: Proceedings of the 12th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 132–9.Find this resource:

Hirst, Graeme (1981). Discourse-oriented anaphora resolution in natural language understanding: A review, American Journal of Computational Linguistics 7(2): 85–98.Find this resource:

Hobbs, Jerry (1990). Literature and cognition. Technical report, CLSI Lecture Notes 21.Find this resource:

Hobbs, Jerry and Andrew Kehler (1997). A theory of parallelism and the case of VP ellipsis, in Philip R. Cohen and Wolfgang Wahlster (eds), Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 394–401.Find this resource:

Hoeks, John C. J., Gisela Redeker, and Petra Hendriks (2009). Fill the gap! Combining pragmatic and prosodic information to make gapping easy, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 38: 221–35.Find this resource:

Hoeks, John C. J., Gisela Redeker, and Louisa J. Zijlstra (2006). The predominance of non-structural factors in the processing of gapping sentences, in Ron Sun (ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis, 1511–16.Find this resource:

(p. 1069) Hoeksema, Jack (1983). Negative polarity and the comparative, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1(3): 403–34.Find this resource:

Hoeksema, Jack (2006). Pseudogapping: Its syntactic analysis and cumulative effects on its acceptability, Research on Language and Computation 4(4): 335–52.Find this resource:

Hofmann, Ronald T. (1976). Past tense replacement and the modal system, in James D. McCawley (ed.), Notes from the linguistic underground. New York: Academic Press, 85–100.Find this resource:

Hofmeister, Philip (2010). A linearization accout of either…or constructions, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28(2): 275–314.Find this resource:

Hofmeister, Philip and Ivan A. Sag (2010). Cognitive constraints and island effects, Language 86(2): 366–415.Find this resource:

Hofmeister, Philip, Laura Staum Casasanto, and Ivan A. Sag (2013). Islands in the grammar? Standards of evidence, in Jon Sprouse and Norbert Hornstein (eds), Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 42–63.Find this resource:

Hofmeister, Philip, T. Florian Jaeger, Ivan A. Sag, Inbal Arnon, and Neal Snider (2007). Locality and accessibility in wh-questions, in Sam Featherston and Wolfgang Sternefeld (eds), Roots: Linguistics in search of its evidential base. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 185–206.Find this resource:

Hogue, Alan (2014). VP ellipsis exhibits structural priming. Poster presented at the 88th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America. Minneapolis, MN.Find this resource:

Höhle, Tilman N. (1991). On reconstruction and coordination, in Hubert Haider and Klaus Netter (eds), Representation and derivation in the theory of grammar, vol. 22. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 139–98.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (1987). Japanese clefts and reconstruction/chain binding effects. Talk presented at WCCFL VI: Sixth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics held at University of Arizona.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (1995a). Demonstrative binding and Principle B, in Jill Beckman (ed.), NELS 25: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 255–72.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (1995b). Theories of anaphora and aspects of Japanese syntax. Ms. USC.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (1997a). Sloppy identity and formal dependency, in Brian Agbanyani and Sze-Wing Tang (eds), Proceedings from the 15th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 209–29.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (1997b). Sloppy identity and principle B, in Hans Bennis, Pierre Pica, and Johan Rooryck (eds), Atomism and binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 205–35.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (1998). Null object and sloppy identity in Japanese, Linguistic Inquiry 29(1): 127–52.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (2003). Surface and deep anaphora, sloppy identity, and experiments in syntax, in Andrew Barss (ed.), Anaphora: A reference guide. Malden, MA: Oxford University Press, 172–236.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (2009). On Saito et al. 2008 (and Saito and Murasugi 1990). Class handout at USC.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (2013). Gengo kagaku o mezasite [Aiming at linguistic science]: Issues on anaphora in Japanese. Shiga: Oshumi Shoten.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (2015). Language faculty science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime (2016). Issues on anaphora in Japanese. Shiga: Oshumi Shoten.Find this resource:

Hoji, Hajime, Satoshi Kinsui, Yukinori Takubo, and Aymui Ueyama (2000). Demonstratives, bound variables, and reconstruction effects, in Proceedings of the Nanzan GLOW. Nagoya: Nanzan University, 141–58.Find this resource:

Holmberg, Anders (1986). Word order and syntactic features. PhD thesis, Stockholm.Find this resource:

Holmberg, Anders (2001). The syntax of yes and no in Finnish, Studia Linguistica 55: 141–74.Find this resource:

Holmberg, Anders (2016). The syntax of yes and no. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hopper, P. and Elizabeth Closs Traugott (2003). Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hornstein, Norbert (1995a). Logical Form: From GB to Minimalism. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Find this resource:

Hornstein, Norbert (1995b). Putting truth into Universal Grammar, Linguistics and Philosophy 18(4): 381–400.Find this resource:

(p. 1070) Hornstein, Norbert, Howard Lasnik, and Juan Uriagereka (2007). The dynamics of islands: Speculations on the locality of movement, Linguistic Analysis 33: 149–75.Find this resource:

Horvath, Julia (2005). Is focus movement driven by stress? Approaches to Hungarian 9: 131–58.Find this resource:

Hough, Julian (2011). Incremental semantics driven natural language generation with self-repairing capability, in Proceedings of the Student Research Workshop associated with RANLP 2011. Hissar, Bulgaria, 79–84.Find this resource:

Hough, Julian (2015). Modelling incremental self-repair processing in dialogue, PhD thesis, Queen Mary University of London.Find this resource:

Hough, Julian and Matthew Purver (2012). Processing self-repairs in an incremental type-theoretic dialogue system, in Proceedings of the 16th SemDial Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SeineDial). France, 136–44.Find this resource:

Houser, Michael (2010). The syntax and semantics of do so anaphora. PhD thesis, University of California at Berkeley.Find this resource:

Houser, Michael, Line Mikkelsen, and Maziar Toosarvandani (2007). Verb phrase pronominalization in Danish: Deep or surface anaphora?, in Erin Brainbridge and Brian Agbanyani (eds), Proceedings of the 34th Western Conference on Linguistics. Fresno, CA: Department of Linguistics, 183–95.Find this resource:

Howes, Christine, Matthew Purver, Pat G. T. Healey, Greg J. Mills, and Eleni Gregoromichelaki (2011). On incrementality in dialogue: Evidence from compound contributions, Dialogue and Discourse 2(1): 279–311.Find this resource:

Hoyt, Frederick and Alexandra Teodorescu (2012). How many types of sluicing, and why: Single and multiple sluicing in Romanian, English, and Japanese, in Jason Merchant and Andrews Simpson (eds), Sluicing: Cross-linguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 83–103.Find this resource:

Huang, C.-T. James (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Find this resource:

Huang, C.-T. James (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns, Linguistic Inquiry 15: 531–74.Find this resource:

Huang, C.-T. James (1988a). Comments on Hasegawa’s paper, in Tawa Wako and Mineharu Nakayama (eds), Proceedings of Japanese Syntax Workshop Issues on Empty Categories. New London: Connecticut College, 77–93.Find this resource:

Huang, C.-T. James (1988b). Wo pao de kuai and Chinese phrase structure, Language 64: 274–311.Find this resource:

Huang, C.-T. James (1991). Remarks on the status of the null object, in Robert Freidin (ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 56–76.Find this resource:

Hubert, Anja (2009). The acquisition of ellipsis and the structure of the noun phrase. Master’s thesis, University of Potsdam.Find this resource:

Huddleston, Rodney (1976). Some theoretical issues in the description of the English verb, Lingua 40: 331–83.Find this resource:

Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey K. Pullum (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard A. (1976a). Arguments for a non-transformational grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard A. (1976b). Conjunction reduction, gapping and right-node raising, Language 52(3): 535–62.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard A. (2003). Gerunds without phrase structure, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 579–615.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard A. (2007). Language networks: The new Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard A. (2010). An introduction to Word Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Huet, Gérard P. (1975). A unification algorithm for typed λ-calculus, Theoretical Computer Science 1(1): 27–57.Find this resource:

Hulsey, Sarah (2008). Focus sensitive coordination. PhD thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

(p. 1071) Hulsey, Sarah and Uli Sauerland (2006). Sorting out relative clauses: A reply to Bhatt, Natural Langauge Semantics 14(1): 111–37.Find this resource:

Hurford, J. R. (2012). The origins of grammar: Language in the light of evolution. Volume II: The origins of grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hyman, Larry M. and Francis X. Katamba (1993). The argument in Luganda: Syntax or pragmatics?, in Sam Mchombo (ed.), Theoretical aspects of Bantu grammar. Stanford: CSLI, 209–56.Find this resource:

Ince, Atakan (2009). Dimensions of ellipsis: Investigations in Turkish. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.Find this resource:

Ince, Atakan (2012). Sluicing in Turkish, in Jason Merchant and Andrew Simpson (eds), Sluicing: Crosslinguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 248–69.Find this resource:

Inoue, Kazuko (1976). Henkei bunpoo to nihongo [Transformational grammar and Japanese]. Tokyo: Taishukan.Find this resource:

Inoue, Kazuko (1978). Nihongo-no bunpoo kisoku [Grammatical rules in Japanese]. Tokyo: Taishukan.Find this resource:

Ionin, Tania (2001). The one girl who was kissed by every boy: Scope, scrambling, and discourse function in Russian, in Marjo van Koppen, Joanna Sio, and Mark de Vos (eds), Proceedings of ConSOLE X. Leiden: SOLE, 79–94.Find this resource:

Ionin, Tania and Ora Matushansky (2013). More than one comparative in more than one Slavic language: An experimental investigation, in Proceedings of the 24th Meeting of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL 21). Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Find this resource:

Ionin, Tania, Ora Matushansky, and Eddy G. Ruys (2011). Parts of speech: Towards a unified semantics for partitives, in Christopher Davis, Amy Rose Deal, and Youri Zabbal (eds), NELS 36: Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 357–71.Find this resource:

Iseda, Takako (2007). On focused NPs with nominative case particle -ga in Japanese, in M. Kelepir and B. Öztürk (eds), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 54: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics (WAFL 2). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, 185–97.Find this resource:

Ishihara, Shinichiro (2012). The clausemate condition in Japanese multiple clefts, in Matt Tucker, Anie Thompson, Olver Northrup, and Ryan Bennett (eds), Proceedings of FAJL 5: Formal Approaches to Japanese Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, 75–88.Find this resource:

Iwakura, Kunihiro (1977). The auxiliary system in English, Linguistic Analysis 3: 101–36.Find this resource:

Izvorski, Roumyana (1995). A solution to the subcomparative paradox, in José Camacho, Lina Choueiri, and Maki Watanabe (eds), Proceedings from the 14th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford: CSLI, 203–19.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray (1971). Gapping and related rules, Linguistic Inquiry 2(1): 21–35.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray (1972). Semantic interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray (1977). X′ syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray (2002). Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (1992a). Antecedent contained deletion in a variable-free semantics, in Chris Barker and David Dowty (eds), SALT 2: Proceedings of the 2nd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 193–213.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (1992b). Flexible categorial grammars: Questions and prospects, in Robert D. Levine (ed.), Formal grammar: Theory and implementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 129–67.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (1992c). Raising without movement, in Richard K. Larson, Sabine Iatridou, Utpal Lahiri, and James Higginbotham (eds.), Control and Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 149–94.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (1994). Binding connectivity in copular sentence, in Mandy Harvey and Lynn Santelmann (eds), SALT 4: Proceedings of the 4th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 145–60.Find this resource:

(p. 1072) Jacobson, Pauline (1999). Towards a variable-free semantics, Linguistics and Philosophy 22(2): 117–84.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2000a). Paycheck pronouns, Bach-Peters sentences, and variable-free semantics, Natural Language Semantics 8(2): 77–155.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2000b). Paychecks, stress, and variable free semantics, in T. Matthews and B. Jackson (eds), SALT 10: Proceedings of the 10th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 65–82.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2003). Binding without pronouns (and pronouns without binding), in G.-J. Kruiff and Richard Oehrle (eds), Binding and resource sensitivity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 57–96.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2008). Direct compositionality and variable-free semantics: The case of Antecedent Contained Deletion, in Kyle Johnson (ed.), Topics in ellipsis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 30–68.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2014). Compositional semantics: An introduction to the syntax-semantics interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2016a). Online appendix to: The short answer: Implications for direct compositionality and vice versa, Language 92: s1–s10.Find this resource:

Jacobson, Pauline (2016b). The short answer: Implications for direct compositionality and vice versa, Language 92: 331–74.Find this resource:

Jäger, Lena A., Lena Benz, Jens Roeser, Brian Dillon, and Shravan Vasishth (2015). Teasing apart retrieval and encoding interference in the processing of anaphors, Frontiers in Psychology 6, <https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00506>.Find this resource:

Jaeger, T. Florian and Harry Tily (2011). On language ‘utility’: Processing complexity and communicative efficiency, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science 2: 323–35.Find this resource:

Jake, Janice L. and Carol Myers-Scotton (2009). Which language? Participation potentials across lexical categories in codeswitching, in Ludmila Isurin, Donald Winford, and Kees de Bot (eds), Multidisciplinary approaches to code-switching. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 207–42.Find this resource:

Jake, Janice L., Carol Myers-Scotton, and Steven Gross (2002). Making a minimalist approach to codeswitching work: Adding the matrix language, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 5(1): 69–91.Find this resource:

Jake, Janice L., Carol Myers-Scotton, and Steven Gross (2005). A response to MacSwan (2005): Keeping the matrix language, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8(3): 271–6.Find this resource:

James, William (1890). The principles of psychology, vol. I. New York: Henry Holt and Co.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2007). The equative sentence in Finnish Sign Language, Sign Language and Linguistics 10: 113–43.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2008). Fixed and free: Order of the verbal predicate and its core arguments in declarative transitive clauses in Finnish Sign Language, SKY Journal of Linguistics 21: 83–123.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2009). Tavu ja lause: Tutkimuksia kahden sekventiaalisen perusyksikön olemuksesta suomalaisessa viittomakielessä [Syllable and sentence: Studies on the nature of two sequential basic units in FinSL]. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2010). Suomalaisen viittomakielen pääsanaluokat [The main parts of speech in FinSL], in Tommi Jantunen (ed.), Näkökulmia viittomaan ja viittomistoon [Perspectives on sign and lexicon]. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 57–78.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2013). Ellipsis in Finnish Sign Language, Nordic Journal of Linguistics 36: 303–32.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2015). Rinnastuksen prosodiaa suomalaisessa viittomakielessä [The prosody of clausal coordination in FinSL], in Mona Lehtinen and Unto K. Laine (eds), XXIX Fonetiikan päivät, Espoo 20. 21.3.2015, Julkaisut—Papers [Proceedings of the XXIX Phonetics Symposium]. Helsinki: Aalto University, 15–21.Find this resource:

Jantunen, Tommi (2016). Clausal coordination in Finnish Sign Language, Studies in Language 40(1): 204–34.Find this resource:

Jayaseelan, Karattuparambil A. (1990). Incomplete VP deletion and gapping, Linguistic Analysis 20(1–2): 64–81.Find this resource:

(p. 1073) Jayaseelan, Karattuparambil A. (2001). IP-internal topic and focus phrases, Studia Linguistica 55(1): 39–75.Find this resource:

Jensen, Britta and Rosalind Thornton (2008). Fragments of child grammar, in M. João Freitas and Anna Gavarró Alguéro (eds), Language acquisition and development: Papers from GALA 2007. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 303–12.Find this resource:

Johannessen, Janne Bondi (1998). Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (1996). When verb phrases go missing, GLOT 2(5): 3–9.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2000a). Few dogs eat Whiskers or cats Alpo, in Kiyomi Kusumoto and Elisabeth Villalta (eds), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 23. Amherst, MA: UMOP, 47–60.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2000b). Gapping determiners, in Kerstin Schwabe and Nina Zhang (eds), Ellipsis in conjunction. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 95–115.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2001a). Sluicing and constraints on quantifier scope, GLOT International 5(6): 217–21.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2001b). What VP ellipsis can do, and what it can’t, but not why, in Mark Baltin and Chris Collins (eds), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 439–79.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2002). Restoring exotic coordinations to normalcy, Linguistic Inquiry 33(1): 97–156.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2004a). In search of the English middle field. Ms. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2004b). How to be quiet, in Nikki Adams, Adam Cooper, Fey Parrill, and Thomas Wier (eds), Proceedings from the 40th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1–20.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2006). Gapping, in M. Evereart, H. C. van Reimsdijk, R. Goedemans, and B. Holledbrandse (eds), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. II. Malden, MA and Oxford: Blackwell, 407–35.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2008a). Introduction, in Kyle Johnson (ed.), Topics in ellipsis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–14.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (ed.) (2008b). Topics in ellipsis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2009). Gapping is not (VP-)ellipsis, Linguistic Inquiry 40(2): 289–328.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle (2014). Gapping. Ms. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Find this resource:

Johnson, Kyle and Satoshi Tomioka (1998). Lowering and mid-size clauses, in Graham Katz, Shin-Sook Kim, and Winhart Haike (eds), Proceedings of the 1997 Tübingen workshop on reconstruction. Tübingen, Germany: Sprachteoretische Grundlagen für die Computer Linguistik, 185–206.Find this resource:

Johnson-Laird, Philip N. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Johnston, Trevor and Adam Schembri (1999). On defining lexeme in a signed language, Sign Language and Linguistics 2: 115–85.Find this resource:

Johnston, Trevor and Adam Schembri (2007). Australian Sign Language: An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Joshi, Aravind (1985). Processing of sentences with intrasentential code switching, in David R. Dowty, Lauri Karttunen, and Arnold Zwicky (eds), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 190–205.Find this resource:

Jun, Sun-Ah (2005). Korean intonational phonology and prosodic transcription, in Sun-Ah Jun (ed.), Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 201–29.Find this resource:

Kaan, Edith, Carlie Overfelt, Do Tromp, and Frank Wijnen (2013). Processing gapped verbs, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 42: 307–38.Find this resource:

Kaan, Edith, Frank Wijnen, and Tamara Y. Swaab (2004). Gapping: Electrophysiological evidence for immediate processing of ‘missing’ verbs in sentence comprehension, Brain and Language 89(3): 584–92.Find this resource:

(p. 1074) Kadowaki, Makoto (2005). N’-ellipsis reconsidered, in Yukio Otsu (ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo, 191–215.Find this resource:

Kallestinova, Elena (2007). Aspects of word order in Russian. PhD thesis, University of Iowa.Find this resource:

Kameyama, Megumi (1985). Zero anaphora: The case of Japanese. PhD thesis, Stanford University.Find this resource:

Kameyama, Megumi (1999). Stressed and unstressed pronouns: Complementary preferences, in Peter Bosch and Rob van der Sandt (eds), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 306–621.Find this resource:

Kamio, Akio (1983). Meisiku-no koozoo [Noun phrase structure], in Kazuko Inoue (ed.), Nihongo-no kihon koozoo [Basic structures in Japanese]. Tokyo: Sanseido, 77–126.Find this resource:

Kaplan, David (1989). Demonstratives: An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals, in Joseph Almog, John Perry, and Howard Wettstein (eds), Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 481–564.Find this resource:

Karimi, Hossein, Kumiko Fukukura, Fernanda Ferreira, and Martin J. Pickering (2014). The effect of noun phrase length on the form of referring expressions, Memory and Cognition 42: 993–1009.Find this resource:

Karimi, Simin (2005). A minimalist approach to scrambling: Evidence from Persian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Katz, Jerrold J. and Paul Postal (1964). An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Kay, Paul (1989). Contextual operators: respective, respectively, and vice versa, in Kira Hall, Michael Meacham, and Richard Shapiro (eds), Proceedings of the 15th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 181–92.Find this resource:

Kay, Paul (2002). English subjectless tagged sentences, Language 78(3): 453–81.Find this resource:

Kayne, Richard S. (1983). Connectedness, Linguistic Inquiry 14(2): 223–49.Find this resource:

Kayne, Richard S. (1984). Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Find this resource:

Kayne, Richard S. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Kayne, Richard S. (1997). The English complementizer of, The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 1(1): 43–54.Find this resource:

Kayne, Richard S. (2015). One and ones as complex determiners. Ms. New York University.Find this resource:

Kazanina, Nina, Ellen Lau, Moti Lieberman, Masaya Yoshida, and Colin Phillips (2007). The effect of syntactic constraints on the processing of backwards anaphora, Journal of Memory and Language 56: 384–409.Find this resource:

Kazenin, Konstantin (2002). On coordination of wh-phrases in Russian. Ms. University of Tuebingen.Find this resource:

Kazenin, Konstantin (2006). Polarity in Russian and typology of predicate ellipsis. Ms. Moscow State University.Find this resource:

Kazenin, Konstantin (2007). O nekotoryx ograničenijax na ellipsis v russkom jazyke [On some restrictions on ellipsis in Russian], Voprosy jazykoznanija 2: 92–107.Find this resource:

Kazenin, Konstantin (2010). Russian gapping: Against ATB, in Gerhild Zybatow, Philip Dudchuk, Serge Minor, and Ekaterina Pshehotskaya (eds), Formal studies in Slavic linguistics. Bern: Peter Lang, 85–100.Find this resource:

Keenan, Edward (1971). Names, quantifiers, and a solution to the sloppy identity problem, Papers in Linguistics 4(2): 211–32.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (1993a). A discourse copying algorithm for ellipsis and anaphora resolution, in Proceedings of the Sixth European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 203–12.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (1993b). The effect of establishing coherence in ellipsis and anaphora resolution, in Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 62–9.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (1994). Common topics and coherent situations: Interpreting ellipsis in the context of discourse inference. In Proceedings of the 32nd Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 50–7.Find this resource:

(p. 1075) Kehler, Andrew (1997). Current theories of centering for pronoun interpretation: A critical evaluation, Computational Linguistics 23: 467–75.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (2000). Coherence and the resolution of ellipsis, Linguistics and Philosophy 23(6): 533–75.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (2002). Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (2007). Contrastive topics and illusory sloppy interpretation in VP-ellipsis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew (2015). On QUD-based licensing of strict and sloppy ambiguities, in Sarah D’Antonio, Mary Moroney, and Carol-Rose Little (eds), Semantics and linguistic theory, vol. 25. Washington DC: LSA and CLC Publications, 512–32.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew and Daniel Büring (2007). Be bound or be disjoint!, in NELS 38: Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 487.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew and Stuart Shieber (1997). Anaphoric dependencies in ellipsis, Computational Linguistics 23(3): 457–66.Find this resource:

Kehler, Andrew and Gregory Ward (2007). Event reference and morphological transparency, in Proceedings of the 35th Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL-07). Department of Linguistics, California State University, Fresno, 115–27.Find this resource:

Kempson, Ruth, Ronnie Cann, Arash Eshghi, Eleni Gregoromichelaki, and Matthew Purver (2015). Ellipsis, in Shalom Lappin and Chris Fox (eds), Handbook of contemporary semantic theory. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 114–40.Find this resource:

Kempson, Ruth, Andrew Gargett, and Eleni Gregoromichelaki (2007). Clarification requests: An incremental account, in Ron Artstein and Laure Vieu (eds), Decalog 2007: Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SemDial 11).Find this resource:

Kempson, Ruth, Wilfried Meyer-Viol, and Dov Gabbay (1999). VP ellipsis: Toward a dynamic, structural account, in Shalom Lappin and Elabbas Benmamoun (eds), Fragments: Studies in ellipsis and gapping. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 227–89.Find this resource:

Kempson, Ruth, Wilfried Meyer-Viol, and Dov Gabbay (2001). Dynamic Syntax: The flow of language understanding. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

Kendon, Adam (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Kenesei, István (1992). On Hungarian complementizers, in István Kenesei and Csaba Pléh (eds), Approaches to Hungarian 4. Szeged: JATE Press, 37–50.Find this resource:

Kenesei, István (1994). Subordinate clauses, in Ferenc Kiefer and Katalin É. Kiss (eds), Syntax and Semantics 27. New York: Academic Press, 275–354.Find this resource:

Kenesei, István (1998). Adjuncts and arguments in VP focus in Hungarian, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45: 61–88.Find this resource:

Kenesei, István (2001). Criteria for auxiliaries in Hungarian, in István Kenesei (ed.), Argument structure in Hungarian. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 73–106.Find this resource:

Kenesei, István, Anna Fenyvesi, and Robert M. Vago (1998). Hungarian. Oxford: Routledge.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (1997). Antecedent contained deletion and the syntax of quantification, Linguistic Inquiry 28(4): 662–88.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (1999). Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. New York: Garland Press.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (2000). Comparative (sub)deletion and ranked, violable constraints in syntax, in Masako Hirotani, Andries Coetzee, Nancy Hall, and Ji-yung Kim (eds), NELS 30: Proceedings of the 30th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 389–414.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (2002). Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(3): 553–621.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (2003). Ellipsis and syntactic representation, in Kerstin Schwabe and Susanne Winkler (eds), The Interfaces: Deriving and interpreting omitted structures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 29–53.Find this resource:

(p. 1076) Kennedy, Christopher (2007). Standards of comparison. Paper presented at the Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique de Paris, 6 October.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (2008). Argument contained ellipsis, in Kyle Johnson (ed.), Topics in ellipsis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 95–131.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher (2009). Modes of comparison, in Malcolm Elliott, James Kirby, Osamu Sawada, Eleni Staraki, and Suwon Yoon (eds), Proceedings of the 43rd annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 141–65.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher and Jeffrey Lidz (2001). A (covert) long distance anaphor in English, in Karine Megerdoomian and Leora Anne Bar-el (eds), Proceedings of the 20th West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 318–31.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher and Jason Merchant (2000a). Attributive comparative deletion, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18(1): 89–146.Find this resource:

Kennedy, Christopher and Jason Merchant (2000b). The case of the missing CP and the secret case, in Sandra Chung, James McCloskey, and Nathan Sanders (eds), Jorge Hankamer Webfest. UCSC. <http://babel.ucsc.edu/Jorge/>.Find this resource:

Kentner, Gerrit, Caroline Féry, and Kai Alter (2008). Prosody in speech production and perception: The case of Right Node Raising in English, in Anita Steube (ed.), The discourse potential of underspecified structures: Event structures and information structures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 207–23.Find this resource:

Kerstens, Johan (1980). Over samentrekking, De Nieuwe Taalgids 73: 375–94.Find this resource:

Kerstens, Johan (1981). Bestaat gapping eigenlijk wel?, Spektator 11: 61–79.Find this resource:

Kertz, Laura (2008). Focus structure and acceptability in verb phrase ellipsis, in Natasha Abner and Jason Bishop (eds), Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 283–91.Find this resource:

Kertz, Laura (2010). Ellipsis reconsidered. PhD thesis, University of California, San Diego.Find this resource:

Kertz, Laura (2013). Verb phrase ellipsis: The view from information structure, Language 89(3): 390–428.Find this resource:

Keshet, Ezra (2013). Sloppy identity unbound, in Todd Snider (ed.), Semantics and linguistic theory 23. Ithaca: CLC Publications, 412–31.Find this resource:

Kester, Ellen-Petra (1996a). Adjectival inflection and the licensing of empty categories in DP, Journal of Linguistics 32: 57–78.Find this resource:

Kester, Ellen-Petra (1996b). The nature of adjectival inflection. Utrecht: LEd.Find this resource:

Khamisi, Abdu M. (1988). A typology of gaps in Kiswahili sentences, Kiswahili 55: 120–33.Find this resource:

Kiguchi, Hirohisa and Rosalind Thornton (2004). Binding principles and ACD constructions in child grammars, Syntax 7(3): 234–71.Find this resource:

Kim, Christina, Gregory M. Kobele, Jeffrey Runner, and John T. Hale (2011). The acceptability cline in VP ellipsis, Syntax 14: 318–54.Find this resource:

Kim, Christina and Jeffrey Runner (2009). Strict identity, coherence, and parallelism in VP ellipsis, in Ed Cormany, Satoshi Ito, and David Lutz (eds), Proceedings of the 19th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, 275–87.Find this resource:

Kim, Christina and Jeffrey Runner (2011). Discourse structure and syntacic parallelism in VP ellipsis, UMass Occasional Papers in Linguistics 38: 75–102.Find this resource:

Kim, Jong-Bok (2001). Interactions between constructions and constraints in VP ellipsis and VP fronting, in Charles Chang et al. (eds), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 107–24.Find this resource:

Kim, Jong-Bok (2006). Similarities and differences between English VP ellipsis and VP fronting: An HPSG analysis, Studies in Generative Grammar 13(3): 429–59.Find this resource:

Kim, Jong-Bok (2015). Syntactic and semantic identity in Korean sluicing: A direct interpretation approach, Lingua 66: 260–93.Find this resource:

Kim, Jong-Bok and Peter Sells (2008). English syntax: An introduction. Stanford: CSLI.Find this resource:

Kim, Jeong-Seok (1997). Syntactic focus movement and ellipsis: A minimalist approach. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut.Find this resource:

(p. 1077) Kim, Soowon (1999). Sloppy/strict identity, empty objects, and NP ellipsis, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8(4): 255–84.Find this resource:

Kimmelman, Vadim (2014). Information structure in Russian Sign Language and Sign Language of the Netherlands. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Find this resource:

Kimura, Hiroko (2010). A wh-in-situ strategy for sluicing, English Linguistics 27: 43–59.Find this resource:

King, Harold V. (1970). On blocking rules for contraction in English, Linguistic Inquiry 1(1): 134–6.Find this resource:

King, Paul John (1989). A logical formalism for Head Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. PhD thesis, University of Manchester.Find this resource:

King, Paul John (1996). An expanded logical formalism for Head Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Technical report, Working Papers of the SFB 340.Find this resource:

Kinsui, Satoshi (1995). Nihongo-no iwayuru N’ sakuzyo-ni tuite [On so-called N’-deletion in Japanese], in Yasuaki Abe (ed.), The Reports for the Third Nanzan University International Symposium on Japanese Education and Linguistics. Nagoya: Nanzan University, 153–76.Find this resource:

Kirchner, Jesse (2006). Sluicing and quasisluicing in Mandarin. Ms. UCSC.Find this resource:

Kitagawa, Chisato and Claudia Ross (1982). Prenominal modification in Chinese and Japanese, Linguistic Analysis 9: 19–53.Find this resource:

Kitagawa, Yoshihisa (1986). Subjects in Japanese and English. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

Kitagawa, Yoshihisa (1991). Copying identity, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9(3): 497–536.Find this resource:

Kitahara, Hisatsugu (1999). Eliminating * as a feature (of traces), in Samuel Epstein and Norbert Hornstein (eds), Working minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 77–93.Find this resource:

Kizu, Mika (1997a). A note on sluicing in wh-in-situ languages, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 36: 143–60.Find this resource:

Kizu, Mika (1997b). Sluicing in wh-in-situ languages, in Kora Singer, Randall Eggert, and Gregory Anderson (eds), Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society, 231–44.Find this resource:

Klavans, Judith (1985). The syntax of code-switching: Spanish and English, in Larry D. King and Catherine A. Maley (eds), Selected papers from the XIIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Language. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 213–31.Find this resource:

Klein, Ewan (1980). A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives, Linguistics and Philosophy 4(1): 1–45.Find this resource:

Klein, Ewan (1991). Comparatives, in Arnim von Stechow and Dieter Wunderlich (eds), Semantik/Semantics: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung/An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 673–91.Find this resource:

Klein, Elaine C. (1993). Toward second language acquistion: A study of Null Prep. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Find this resource:

Klein, Udo, Dolgor Guntsetseg, and Klaus von Heusinger (2012). Case in conflict: Embedded subjects in Mongolian, in Monique Lamers and Peter de Swart (eds), Case, word order, and prominence. Dordrecht: Springer, 43–64.Find this resource:

Klein, Wolfgang (1985). Ellipse, Fokusgliederung und thematischer Stand, in Reinhard Meyer-Hermann and Hannes Rieser (eds), Ellipsen und fragmentarische Ausdrücke. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1–24.Find this resource:

Klein, Wolfgang (1993). Ellipse, in Joachim Jacobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld, and Theo Vennemann (eds), Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 763–99.Find this resource:

Klein, Wolfgang and Christiane von Stutterheim (1987). Quaestio und referentielle Bewegung in Erzählungen, Linguistische Berichte 109: 163–83.Find this resource:

Vander Klok, Jozina (2016). Diagnosing VP-ellipsis in Javanese: Evidence for a non-movement account, in Henrison Hsieh (ed.), AFLA 22: Proceedings of the 22nd meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association. Canberra: Australian National University, 202–19.Find this resource:

(p. 1078) Kluck, Marlies (2009). Good neighbors or far friends. Matching and proximity effects in Dutch Right Node Raising, Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 48: 115–58.Find this resource:

Kluck, Marlies (2011). Sentence amalgamation. PhD thesis, University of Groningen.Find this resource:

Kluck, Marlies (2014). Merchant’s wrinkle: The ban on Dutch bare R-pronoun ellipsis remnants. Paper presented at the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 32 (WCCFL32).Find this resource:

Kluck, Marlies and Mark de Vries (2013). Cumulative rightward processes, in Gert Webelhuth, Manfred Sailer, and Heike Walker (eds), Rightward movement in a comparative perspective. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 281–317.Find this resource:

Kluender, Robert (1998). On the distinction between strong and weak islands: A processing perspective, in Peter W. Culicover and Louise McNally (eds), Syntax and semantics 29: The limits of syntax. New York: Academic Press, 241–79.Find this resource:

Kluender, Robert and Simone Gieselman (2013). What’s negative about negative islands? A re-evaluation of extraction from weak island contexts, in Jon Sprouse and Norbert Hornstein (eds), Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 186–207.Find this resource:

Kobele, Gregory M. (2006). Generating copies: An investigation into structural identity in language and grammar. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Find this resource:

Kobele, Gregory M. (2012a). Eliding the derivation: A minimalist formalization of ellipsis, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI, 409–26.Find this resource:

Kobele, Gregory M. (2012b). Ellipsis: Computation of, WIREs Cognitive Science 3(3): 411–18.Find this resource:

Kobele, Gregory M. (2015). LF-copying without LF, Lingua 166: 236–59.Find this resource:

Koeneman, Olaf, Sergio Baauw, and Frank Wijnen (1998). Reconstruction in VP-ellipsis: Reflexive vs. nonreflexive predicates. Poster presented at the 11th Annual Conference on Human Sentence Processing.Find this resource:

Koizumi, Masatoshi (1995). Phrase structure in Minimalist syntax. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Find this resource:

Kolokonte, Marina (2008). Bare Argument Ellipsis and information structure. PhD thesis, Newcastle University.Find this resource:

Konietzko, Andreas (2014). The syntax and information structure of Bare Argument Ellipsis in English and German: Experimental and theoretical evidence. PhD thesis, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.Find this resource:

Konietzko, Andreas, Janina Radó, and Susanne Winkler (forthcoming). Focus constraints on relative clause antecedents in sluicing, in Sam Featherston, Robin Hörnig, Sophia von Wietersheim, and Susanne Winkler (eds), Information structure and semantic processing. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Konietzko, Andreas and Susanne Winkler (2010). Contrastive ellipsis: Mapping between syntax and information structure, Lingua 120: 1436–57.Find this resource:

Koopman, Hilda Judith and Dominique Sportiche (1991). The position of subjects, Lingua 85: 211–58.Find this resource:

Koopman, Hilda Judith and Anna Szabolcsi (2000). Verbal complexes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Kornfeld, Laura and Andrés Saab (2004). Nominal ellipsis and morphological structure in Spanish, in Reineke Bok-Benneman, Bart Hollebrandse, Brigitte Kampers-Manhe, and Petra Sleeman (eds), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2002. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 183–98.Find this resource:

Kornfeld, Laura and Andrés Saab (2005). Hacía una tipología de las anáforas nominales en español. Talk given at the III Encuentro de Gramática Generativa.Find this resource:

Koster, Jan (1975). Dutch as an SOV language, Linguistic Analysis 1: 111–36.Find this resource:

Koster, Jan (1986). Domains and dynasties. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Find this resource:

Koulidobrova, Elena (2012). When the quiet surfaces: ‘Transfer’ of argument omission in the speech of ASL-English bilinguals. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut.Find this resource:

Koutsoudas, Andreas (1971). Gapping, conjunction reduction, and coordinate deletion, Foundations of Language 7(3): 337–86.Find this resource:

(p. 1079) Kraak, Albert (1967). Presuppositions and the analysis of adverbs. Ms. MIT.Find this resource:

Krahmer, Emiel and Reinhard Muskens (1995). Negation and disjunction in discourse representation theory, Journal of Semantics 12: 357–76.Find this resource:

Kranendonk, Huib (2011). Quantificational constructions in the Dutch nominal domain: Facets of Dutch microvariation. PhD thesis, Utrecht University.Find this resource:

Kratzer, Angelika (1996). Severing the external argument from its verb, in Johan Rooryck and Laurie Zaring (eds), Phrase structure and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 109–37.Find this resource:

Kratzer, Angelika and Junko Shimoyama (2002). Indeterminate pronouns: The view from Japanese, in Yukio Otsu (ed.), Proceedings of the Tokyo conference on psycholinguistics, vol. 3. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo, 1–25.Find this resource:

Krifka, Manfred (1991). A compositional semantics for multiple focus constructions, in Steven Moore and Adam Zachary Wyner (eds), Proceedings of the First Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 127–58.Find this resource:

Krifka, Manfred (2006). Association with focus phrases, in V. Molnár and Susanne Winkler (eds), The architecture of focus. Studies in Generative Grammar 82. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 105–35.Find this resource:

Krifka, Manfred (2008). Basic notions of information structure, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55(3–4): 243–376.Find this resource:

Kubota, Yusuke (2015). Nonconstituent coordination in Japanese as constituent coordination: An analysis in Hybrid Type-Logical Grammar, Linguistic Inquiry 46: 1–42.Find this resource:

Kubota, Yusuke and Robert Levine (2012). Gapping as like-category coordination, in Denis Bechet and Alexander Dikovsky (eds), Logical aspects of computational linguistics. Lecture notes in computer science 7351. Berlin: Springer, 135–50.Find this resource:

Kubota, Yusuke and Robert Levine (2016). Gapping as hypothetical reasoning, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 34: 107–56.Find this resource:

Kubota, Yusuke and Robert Levine (2017). Pseudogapping as pseudo-VP-ellipsis, Linguistic Inquiry 48(2): 213–57.Find this resource:

Kučerová, I. and A. Neeleman (eds) (2012). Contrasts and positions in information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1975). Conditions for verb phrase deletion, Foundations of Language 13: 161–75.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1976). Gapping: A functional analysis, Linguistic Inquiry 7(2): 300–18.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1978a). Danwa-no bunpoo. [Discourse grammar]. Tokyo: Taishukan.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1978b). Japanese: A characteristic OV language, in Winfred Lehmann (ed.), Syntactic typology. Austin: University of Texas Press, 57–138.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1979). Newness of information and order of deletion, Cahiers Charles V: Recherches de l’Institut d’Anglais Charles 1: 211–21.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1980). Discourse deletion, in Susumu Kuno (ed.), Harvard Studies in Syntax and Semantics 3. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1–144.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1982). Principles of discourse deletion: Case studies from English, Russian, and Japanese, Journal of Semantics 1: 61–93.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu (1986). Anaphora in Japanese, in Sige-Yuki Kuroda (ed.), Working Papers from the First SDF Workshop in Japanese Syntax. La Jolla: USCD, 11–70.Find this resource:

Kuno, Susumu and Kiyoko Masunaga (1986). Questions with wh-phrases in islands, University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 11: 139–65.Find this resource:

Kunze, Jürgen (1975). Abhängigkeitsgrammatik. Studia Grammatica XII. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Find this resource:

Kuroda, Sige-Yuki (1965). Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. PhD thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Kuroda, Sige-Yuki (1988). Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese, Linguisticae Investigationes 12: 1–47.Find this resource:

Kuroda, Sige-Yuki (1992). Japanese syntax and semantics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Find this resource:

Kush, Dave (2017). Notes on gapping in Hindi-Urdu: Conjunct size and focus-parallelism, Linguistic Analysis 40(3–4): 255–96.Find this resource:

(p. 1080) Kush, Dave, Jeffrey Lidz, and Colin Phillips (2015). Relation-sensitive retrieval: Evidence from bound variable pronouns, Journal of Memory and Language 82: 18–40.Find this resource:

Kuwabara, Kazuki (1996). Multiple wh-phrases in elliptical clauses and some aspects of clefts with multiple foci, in Masatoshi Koizumi, Masayuki Oishi, and Uli Sauerland (eds), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 29: Formal Approaches to Japanese Linguistics 2. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, 97–116.Find this resource:

Kuwabara, Kazuki (1997). On the properties of truncated clauses in Japanese, in Kazuko Inoue (ed.), Researching and verifying an advanced theory of human language. Chiba: Kanda University of International Studies, 61–84.Find this resource:

Labov, William (1969). Contraction, deletion and the inherent variability of the English copula, Language 45(4): 715–62.Find this resource:

Labov, William (1971). The notion of system in Creole studies, in Dell Hymes (ed.), Pidginization and creolization of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 447–72.Find this resource:

Laczkó, Tibor (2007). On elliptical noun phrases in Hungarian, in Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King (eds), Proceedings of the LFG’07 Conference. Stanford: CSLI, 323–42.Find this resource:

Ladd, D. Robert (2008). Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Ladewig, Silva (2014). Creating multimodal utterances: The linear integration of gestures into speech, in Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Jana Bressem (eds), Body—Language—Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1662–77.Find this resource:

Laka, Itziar (1990). Negation in syntax: On the nature of functional categories and their projections. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Find this resource:

Lakoff, George (1968). Pronouns and reference, in James D. McCawley (ed.), Syntax and semantics 7: Notes from the linguistic underground. New York: Academic Press, 275–335.Find this resource:

Lakoff, George (1970). Global rules, Language 46: 627–39.Find this resource:

Lakoff, George (1972). The arbitrary basis of transformational grammar, Language 48(1): 76–87.Find this resource:

Lakoff, George (1974). Syntactic amalgams, in Michael Galy, Robert Fox, and Anthony Bruck (eds), Papers from the 10th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: University of Chicago, 321–44.Find this resource:

Lakoff, George (1986). Frame semantic control of the Coordinate Structure Constraint, in Anne M. Farley, Peter T. Farley, and Karl-Erik McCullough (eds), Proceedings of the 22nd annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 22. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 152–67.Find this resource:

Lakoff, George and Stanley Peters (1967). Phrasal conjunction and symmetric predicates, in David A. Reibel and Sandford A. Schane (eds), Modern studies in English: Readings in transformational grammar. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 113–42.Find this resource:

Lakoff, Robin T. (1971). Ifs, ands, and buts about conjunction, in Charles J. Fillmore and D. Terence Langendoen (eds), Studies in linguistic semantics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 115–49.Find this resource:

Lambrecht, Knud (1990). ‘What, me worry?’—‘Mad magazine sentences’ revisited, in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, vol. 16. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 215–28.Find this resource:

Lambrecht, Knud (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Lance, David (1975). Spanish-English code-switching, in Eduardo Hernández-Chávez, Andrew D. Cohen, and Anthony F. Beltramo (eds), El lenguaje de los chicanos. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics, 138–53.Find this resource:

Landau, Idan (2013). Control in generative grammar: A research companion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Langacker, Ronald W. (1969). On pronominalization and the chain of command, in David A. Reibel and Sanford A. Schane (eds), Modern Studies in English: Readings in Transformational Grammar. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 160–86.Find this resource:

Lappin, Shalom (1992). The syntactic basis of ellipsis resolution, in Steve Berman and Arild Hestvik (eds), Proceedings of the Stuttgart Ellipsis Workshop, Stuttgart: Universität Stuttgart.Find this resource:

(p. 1081) Lappin, Shalom (1996). The interpretation of ellipsis, in Shalom Lappin (ed.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 145–75.Find this resource:

Lappin, Shalom (1999). An HPSG account of antecedent-contained ellipsis, in Shalom Lappin and Elabbas Benmamoun (eds), Fragments: Studies in ellipsis and gapping. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 68–97.Find this resource:

Lappin, Shalom (2005). A sequenced model of anaphora and ellipsis resolution, in António Branco, Tony McEnery, and Ruslan Mitkov (eds), Anaphora processing: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational modelling. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 3–16.Find this resource:

Lappin, Shalom and Michael McCord (1990). Anaphora resolution in slot grammar, Computational Linguistics 16(4): 197–212.Find this resource:

Larson, Bradley (2012). A dilemma with accounts of Right Node Raising, Linguistic Inquiry 43: 143–50.Find this resource:

Larson, Bradley (2013). The syntax of non-syntactic dependencies. PhD thesis, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

Larson, Bradley (2014). Unelided basic remnants in Germanic ellipsis or: ÜBRIGE arguments, University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20(1): article 20.Find this resource:

Larson, Richard (1988a). On the double object construction, Linguistic Inquiry 19(3): 335–92.Find this resource:

Larson, Richard (1988b). Scope and comparatives, Linguistics and Philosophy 11(1): 1–26.Find this resource:

Larson, Richard (1990). Double objects revisited: Reply to Jackendoff, Linguistic Inquiry 21(4): 589–632.Find this resource:

Larson, Richard and Hiroko Yamakido (2003). A new form of nominal ellipsis in Japanese, in Patricia M. Clancy (ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 11. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 485–98.Find this resource:

Larsson, Staffan (2002). Issue-based dialogue management. PhD thesis, Gothenburg University.Find this resource:

Larsson, Staffan (2015). Formal semantics for perceptual classification, Journal of Logic and Computation 25(2): 335–69.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (1976). Remarks on coreference, Linguistic Analysis 2: 1–22.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (1995a). Case and expletives revisited: On greed and other human failings, Linguistic Inquiry 26(4): 615–34.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (1995b). Verbal morphology: Syntactic structures meets the minimalist program, in Hector Campos and Paula Kempchinsky (eds), Evolution and revolution in linguistic theory. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 251–75.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (1997). A gap in an ellipsis paradigm: Some theoretical implications, Linguistic Analysis 27: 166–85.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (1999a). A note on pseudogapping, in Howard Lasnik (ed.), Minimalist analysis. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 151–74.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (1999b). Pseudogapping puzzles, in Shlom Lappin and Elabbas Benmamoun (eds), Fragments: Studies in ellipsis and gapping. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 141–74.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (2001). When can you save a structure by destroying it?, in Minjoo Kim and Uri Strauss (eds), NELS 31: Proceedings of the 31st annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 301–20.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (2003). On feature strength: Three Minimalist approaches to overt movement, Minimalist Investigations in Linguistic Theory 30: 197–217.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (2005). Review of The syntax of silence, by Jason Merchant, Language 81(1): 259–65.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (2010). On ellipsis: Is material that is phonetically absent but semantically present present or absent syntactically? in H. Götzche (ed.), Memory, mind and language. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 221–42.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (2011). Ellipsis and island violation repair. Handout for LING 819, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard (2014). Multiple sluicing in English? Syntax 17: 1–20.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard and Myung-Kwan Park (2003). The EPP and the Subject Condition under sluicing, Linguistic Inquiry 34(4): 649–60.Find this resource:

(p. 1082) Lasnik, Howard and Myung-Kwan Park (2013). Locality and MaxElide in extraction out of elided VP, in Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi, Koji Sugisaki, and Asako Uchibori (eds), Deep insights, broad perspectives: Essays in honor of Mamuro Saito. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, 235–56.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito (1984). On the nature of proper government, Linguistic Inquiry 15(2): 235–89.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito (1991). On the subject of infinitives, in Lise M. Dobrin, Lynn Nichols, and Rosa M. Rodriguez (eds), Proceedings of the 27th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 324–43.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito (1992). Move α. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Lasnik, Howard and Tim Stowell (1991). Weakest crossover, Linguistic Inquiry 22(4): 687–720.Find this resource:

Lebeaux, David (1990). Relative clauses, licensing, and the nature of the derivation, in Juli Carter, Dechaine Rose-Marie, Bill Philip, and Tim Sherer (eds), NELS 20: Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association, 318–32.Find this resource:

Lebeaux, David (2009). Where does the Binding Theory apply? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (1997). Some remarks on phrasal comparatives. Paper presented at the International Syntax Roundtable, Ypps/Danube, 6–9 July 1997.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (1998). Comparative deletion. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (2001). Reduced and phrasal comparatives, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19(4): 683–735.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (2004). Ellipsis in comparatives. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (2015). Zwei bemerkungen zur Verbbewegung. Paper presented at the University of Hamburg.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (2016). On the typology of phrasal comparatives. Paper presented at the University of Vienna.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried (forthcoming). Clausal vs. phrasal comparatives, in Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, and Thomas Ede Zimmermann (eds), The Blackwell Companion to Semantics. Malden: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Lechner, Winfried and Norbert Corver (2017). Comparative deletion and comparative subdeletion, in Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax. 2nd edition. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 865–922.Find this resource:

Lee, Yong-hun (2012). A unified approach to VP-ellipsis and VP-anaphora, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI, 271–90.Find this resource:

Lees, Robert (1961). The English comparative construction, Word 17: 171–85.Find this resource:

Leonetti, Manuel (1999). El artículo, in Ignacio Bosque and Violeta Demonte (eds), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 787–890.Find this resource:

Lerner, Jan and Manfred Pinkal (1995). Comparative ellipsis and variable binding, in Mandy Simons and Tim Galloway (eds), Semantics and linguistic theory. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 222–36.Find this resource:

Leung, Tommi (2014). The preposition stranding generalization and conditions on sluicing: Evidence from Emirati Arabic, Linguistic Inquiry 45: 332–40.Find this resource:

Levelt, Willem J. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech, Cognition 14(4): 41–104.Find this resource:

Levin, Lori (1982). Sluicing: A lexical interpretation procedure, in Joan Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 590–654.Find this resource:

Levin, Nancy S. (1978). Some identity-of-sense deletions puzzle me, in D. Farkas, W. Jacobsen, and K. Todrys (eds), Papers from the 14th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 229–40.Find this resource:

Levin, Nancy S. (1980). Main verb ellipsis in spoken English, in Arnold M. Zwicky, Clitics and ellipsis. Columbus: Ohio State University, 65–165.Find this resource:

(p. 1083) Levin, Nancy S. (1986). Main-verb ellipsis in spoken English. New York: Garland Publishing.Find this resource:

Levin, Nancy S. and Ellen F. Prince (1986). Gapping and clausal implicature, Papers in Linguistics 19: 351–64.Find this resource:

Levine, Robert D. (1985). Right Node (non)-Raising, Linguistic Inquiry 16(3): 492–7.Find this resource:

Levine, Robert D. (2001). The extraction riddle: Just what are we missing? Journal of Linguistics 37: 145–74.Find this resource:

Levine, Robert D. (2011). Linearization and its discontents, in Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI, 126–46.Find this resource:

Levine, Robert D. and Yusuke Kubota (2013). Gapping as hypothetical reasoning. Ms. Ohio State University.Find this resource:

Lewis, David (1979). Score keeping in a language game, in Rainer Bauerle, Urs Egli, and Arnim von Stechow (eds), Semantics from different points of view. Dordrecht: Springer, 172–87.Find this resource:

Lewis, Richard L., Shravan Vasishth, and Julie A. Van Dyke (2006). Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10: 44–54.Find this resource:

Liceras, Juana M., Raquel Fernández Fuertes, Susana Perales, Rocío Pérez-Tattam, and Kenton T. Spradlin (2008). Gender and gender agreement in bilingual native and non-native grammars: A view from child and adult functional-lexical mixings, Lingua 118(6): 827–51.Find this resource:

Liddell, Scott K. (1980). American Sign Language syntax. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Liddell, Scott K. (2003). Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Lin, Jo-Wang (2009). Chinese comparatives and their implicational parameters, Natural Language Semantics 17(1): 1–27.Find this resource:

Lin, Vivian (1999). Determiner sharing, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 33: 241–77.