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: 21 August 2019

(p. 643) References

(p. 643) References

Abe, J. (2005). Economy of scrambling. MS, Tohoku Gaikuin University, Sendai, Japan.Find this resource:

Abels, K. (2003). Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding. Ph.D. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Find this resource:

——— (2004). Right node raising: Ellipsis or across the board movement? In K. Moulton and M. Wolf (eds.), Proceedings of the North-Eastern Linguistic Society 34. Amherst: GLSA, 45–60.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Towards a restrictive theory of (remnant) movement: Improper movement, remnant movement, and a linear asymmetry. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 7: 53–120.Find this resource:

——— and A. Neeleman (2006). Universal 20 without the LCA. MS, University College LondonFind this resource:

.

[A version published in J. M. Brucart, A. Gavarró, and J. Sola (eds.), Merging features: Computation, interpretation, and acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 60–79.]Find this resource:

Abelson, H., and G. Sussman (1984). Structure and interpretation of computer programs. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Abney, S. (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Aboh, E. (2006). When verbal predicates go fronting. ZAZ Papers in Linguistics 46: 21–48.Find this resource:

Ackema, P., and A. Neeleman (2004). Beyond morphology: Interface conditions on word formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Adger, D. (2003). Core syntax: A minimalist approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). A minimalist theory of feature structure. In A. Kibort and G. Corbett (eds.), Features: Perspectives on a key notion in linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and G. Ramchand (2005). Merge and Move: Wh-dependencies revisited. Linguistic Inquiry 36.2: 161–93.Find this resource:

Agbayani, B. (2006). Pied-piping, feature movement, and wh-subjects. In L. L.-S. Cheng and N. Corver (eds.), Wh-movement: Moving on. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 71–93.Find this resource:

Aissen, J., and D. Perlmutter (1970). Clause reduction in Spanish. In H. Thompson, K. Whistler, V. Edge, J. Jaeger, R. Javkin, M. Petruck, C. Smeall, and R. D. Van Valin (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 1–30.Find this resource:

Reprinted in D. Perlmutter (ed.), Studies in relational grammar, vol. 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 360–403.Find this resource:

Alboiu, G. (2000). The features of movement in Romanian. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.Find this resource:

——— M. Barrie, and C. Frigeni (2004). SE and the unaccusative/unergative paradox. In M. Coene, G. de Cuyper, and Y. DʼHulst (eds.), Antwerp Working Papers in Linguistics, 109–39.Find this resource:

Alexiadou, A., and E. Anagnostopoulou (1998). Parametrizing Agr: Word order, verbmovement and EPP-checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16: 491–539.Find this resource:

(p. 644) Alexiadou, A., Anagnostopoulou E., and M. Everaert (eds.) (2004). The unaccusativity puzzle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, J. M. (2006). Structural analogy and universal grammar. Lingua 116: 601–33.Find this resource:

Anderson, S. R. (1972). How to get even. Language 48: 893–906.Find this resource:

——— (1993). Wackernagel's revenge: Clitics, morphology, and the syntax of second position. Language 69: 68–98.Find this resource:

Andrews, A. (1982). The representation of case in Modern Icelandic. In J. Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 426–503.Find this resource:

Aoun, J. (1979). On government, case-marking and clitic placement. MS, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1986). Bound pronouns in Chinese. In S. Berman, J. W. Choe, and J. McDonough (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of NELS. Amherst, University of Massachusetts, GLSA.Find this resource:

——— and Y. A. Li (1989). Constituency and scope. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 141–72.Find this resource:

——— and J. Nunes (2007). Vehicle change phenomena as an argument for Move-F. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 525–38.Find this resource:

Arnauld, A., and C. Lancelot (1975[1660]). Grammaire générale et raisonnée, contenant les fondements de lʼart de parler expliquez dʼune manière claire et naturelle. Paris.Find this resource:

Translated as General and rational grammar: the Port-Royal grammar, The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Arsenijević, B. (2007). Phases as complete referential expressions. In C. de Cuba and I. Mitrovic (eds.), Proceedings from the Novi Sad Generative Linguistics Workshop 2007. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet u Novom Sadu.Find this resource:

Asudeh, A. (2004). Resumption as resource management. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.Find this resource:

Baauw, S. (2000). Grammatical features and the acquisition of reference: A comparative study of Dutch and Spanish. Ph.D. thesis, Utrecht University.Find this resource:

Bach, E., and B. Partee (1980). Anaphora and semantic structure. In J. Kreiman and A. E. Ojeda (eds.), Papers from the parasession on pronouns and anaphora. Chicago Linguistic Society 16, 1–28.Find this resource:

Bachrach, A., and R. Katzir (2009). Right-node raising and delayed spellout. In K. Grohmann (ed.), Interphases: Phase-theoretic investigations of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 283–316.Find this resource:

——— and M. Wagner (2007). Syntactically driven cyclicity vs. output? Output correspondence: The case of adjunction in diminutive morphology. MS, MIT and Cornell University.Find this resource:

Bailyn, J. F. (2001). On scrambling: A reply to Bošković and Takahashi. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 635–58.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Does Russian scrambling exist? In S. Karimi (ed.), Word order and scrambling. Oxford: Blackwell, 156–76.Find this resource:

Baker, M. C. (1985a). Incorporation: A theory of grammatical-function changing. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1985b). The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 373–415.Find this resource:

——— (1988). Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

——— (1996). The polysynthesis parameter. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook of generative syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 73–137.Find this resource:

——— (2001). The atoms of language. New York: Basic Books.Find this resource:

(p. 645) Baker, M. C. (2003). Verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2008). The macroparameter in a microparametric world. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 351–73.Find this resource:

——— and C. Collins (2006). Linkers and the internal structure of vP. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24: 307–54.Find this resource:

——— and N. Vinokurova (2008). Two modalities of case assignment: Case in Sakha. MS, Rutgers University. (http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/∼mabaker/sakha_case_Sept2008.pdf)Find this resource:

[Revised version to appear in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.]Find this resource:

Balari, S., A. Benítez-Burraco, M. Camps, V. M. Longa, G. Lorenzo, and J. Uriagereka (2008). ¿Homo loquens neanderthalensis? En torno a las capacidades simbólicas y lingüísticas del Neandertal. Munibe. Antropologia-Arkeologia 59: 3–24.Find this resource:

——— and G. Lorenzo (2009). Computational phenotypes: where the theory of computation meets Evo-Devo. Biolinguistics 3, 2–60.Find this resource:

Baltin, M. R. (1982). A landing site theory of movement rules. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 1–38.Find this resource:

——— (1989). Heads and projections. In M. R. Baltin and A. S. Kroch (eds.), Alternative conceptions of phrase structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1–16.Find this resource:

——— (1992). On the characterization of the effects of D-linking: comments on Cinque. In R. Freidin (ed.), Current issues in comparative grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 249–56.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Movement to the higher V is remnant movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 653–9.Find this resource:

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

Barbiers, S., O. Koeneman, and M. Lekakou (2010). Syntactic doubling and the nature of wh-chains. Journal of Linguistics 46: 1–46.Find this resource:

——— J. van der Auwera, H. Bennis, M. van der Ham, G. de Vogelaer, and E. Boef (2008). Syntactic atlas of Dutch dialects, vol. 2. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Find this resource:

Barss, A., and H. Lasnik (1986). A note on anaphora and double objects. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 347–54.Find this resource:

Barton, G. E., R. C. Berwick, and E. S. Ristad (1987). Computational complexity and natural language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Barwise, J., and R. Cooper (1981). Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4: 159–219.Find this resource:

Basilico, D. (2003). The topic of small clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 1–35.Find this resource:

Bauer, L. (2001). Compounding. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher, and W. Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 695–707.Find this resource:

Beck, S. (1996). Quantified structures as barriers for LF movement. Natural Language Semantics 4: 1–56.Find this resource:

——— and K. Johnson (2004). Double objects again. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 97–123.Find this resource:

Behar, D. M., R. Villems, H. Soodyall, J. Blue-Smith, L. Pereira, E. Metspalu, R. Scozzari, H. Makkan, S. Tzur, D. Comas, J. Bertranpetit, L. Quintana-Murci, C. Tyler-Smith, R. Spencer Wells, S. Rosset, and The Genographic Consortium (2008). The dawn of human matrilineal diversity. American Journal of Human Genetics 82: 1130–40.Find this resource:

Béjar, S. (2004). Phi syntax. Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto.Find this resource:

Belletti, A. (1990). Generalized verb movement. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.Find this resource:

——— (2004a). Aspects of the low IP area. In Rizzi (2004c: 16–51).Find this resource:

——— (ed.) (2004b). Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, volume 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 646) Belletti, A., and L. Rizzi (1988). Psych-verbs and Ë-theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6: 291–352.Find this resource:

——— and L. Rizzi (1996). Parameters and functional heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Benincà, P., and C. Poletto (2004). Topic, Focus, and V2: defining the CP sublayers. In Rizzi (2004c: 52–75).Find this resource:

Benítez-Burraco, A. (2009). Genes y lenguajes: Aspectos ontogenéticos, filogenéticos y cognitivos. Barcelona: Reverté.Find this resource:

——— V. M. Longa, G. Lorenzo, and J. Uriagereka (2008). Also sprach Neanderthalis … or did she? Biolinguistics 2: 225–32.Find this resource:

Bentzen, K. (2007). Order and structure in embedded clauses in northern Norwegian. Ph.D. thesis, University of Tromsø.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Subject positions and their interaction with verbmovement. Studia Linguistica 63, 261–91.Find this resource:

——— P. Garbacz, C. Heycock, and G. H. Hrafnbjargarson (2009). On variation in Faroese verb placement. Nordlyd 36: 2.Find this resource:

Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word 14: 150–77.Find this resource:

Berwick, R. C. (1981). Computational complexity of lexical functional grammar. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL81, 7–12.Find this resource:

——— (1985). The acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and N. Chomsky (forthcoming). The biolinguistic program: The current state of its evolution and development. In A.-M. Di Sciullo and C. Boeckx (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human Language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and P. Niyogi (1996). Learning from triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 605–22.Find this resource:

——— and A. S. Weinberg (1984). The grammatical basis of linguistic performance: Language use and acquisition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bever, T. G. (1972). The integrated study of language behaviour. In J. Morton (ed.), Language: Biological and social factors. London: Logos Press, 159–206.Find this resource:

Beys, M. (2006). The status of linkers in Bantu languages: A reply to Baker & Collins (2006). MS, University of Cyprus, Nicosia.Find this resource:

Bhatt, R., and R. Pancheva (2004). Late merger of degree clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 1–45.Find this resource:

Biberauer, T. (2008). The limits of syntactic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

——— A. Holmberg, and I. Roberts (2008). Structure and linearization in disharmonic word orders. Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 26: 96–104.Find this resource:

——— ——— ——— and M. Sheehan (eds.) (2010). Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— and M. D. Richards (2006). True optionality: When the grammar doesn't mind. In C. Boeckx (ed.), Minimalist essays. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 35–67.Find this resource:

——— and I. Roberts (2010). Subjects, tense and verbmovement in Germanic and Romance. In T. Biberauer, A. Holmberg, I. Roberts, and M. Sheehan (eds.), Syntactic variation: The null subject parameter and the minimalist program. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 263–302.Find this resource:

Bickerton, D. (1990). Language and species. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

——— (1996). Language and human behaviour. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Find this resource:

Bikel, D. (2004). Intricacies of Collins parsing model. Computational Linguistics 30: 479–511.Find this resource:

(p. 647) Bittner, M., and K. Hale (1996). Ergativity: Toward a theory of a heterogeneous class. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 531–604.Find this resource:

Blaho, S. (2008). The syntax of phonology: A radically substance-free approach. Ph.D. thesis, University of Tromsø.Find this resource:

Blake, B. J., and J. G. Breen (1971). The Pitta-Pitta dialects. Linguistic Communications 4, Melbourne: Monash University.Find this resource:

Blass, A., N. Dershowitz, and Y. Gurevich (2008). When are two algorithms the same? University of Michigan, Tel Aviv University, and Microsoft Research. http://arxiv.org/abs/0811.0811.Find this resource:

Blevins, J. (2004). Evolutionary phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bloem, R., and J. Engelfriet (2000). A comparison of tree transductions defined by monadic second order logic and by attribute grammars. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 611: 1–50.Find this resource:

Bloom, P. (1990). Syntactic distinctions in child language. Journal of Child Language 17: 343–55.Find this resource:

Bloomfield, L. (1926). A set of postulates for the science of language. Language 2: 153–64.Find this resource:

——— (1933). Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Find this resource:

Bobaljik, J. D. (1995a). Morphosyntax: The syntax of verbal inflection. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1995b). In terms of merge. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27: 41–64.Find this resource:

——— (1999). Adverbs: the hierarchy paradox. GLOT International 4: 27–8.Find this resource:

——— (2001). The implications of rich agreement: Why morphology doesn't drive syntax. In K. Megerdoomian and L. A. Bar-el (eds.), WCCFL 20 Proceedings. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 82–95.Find this resource:

——— (2002). A-Chains at the PF-interface: Copies and covert movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 197–267.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Where's Phi? Agreement as a postsyntactic operation. In D. Harbour, D. Adger, and S. Béjar (eds.), Phi theory: Phi-features across modules and interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 295–328.Find this resource:

——— and S. Brown (1997). Interarboreal operations: Head movement and the extension requirement. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 345–56.Find this resource:

——— and I. Landau (2009). Icelandic control is not A-movement: The case from case. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 113–32.Find this resource:

Boeckx, C. (2001). Scope reconstruction and A-movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 503–48.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Agree or attract? A relativized minimality solution to a proper binding condition puzzle. In A. Alexiadou (ed.), Theoretical approaches to universals. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 41–64.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

——— (2004). Bare syntax (version 1). MS, Harvard University.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Generative grammar and modern cognitive science. Journal of Cognitive Science 6: 45–54.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Linguistic minimalism: Origins, concepts, methods, and aims. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Understanding minimalist syntax: Lessons from locality in long-distance dependencies. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— (2008a). Bare syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 648) Boeckx, C. (2008b). Linguistic invariance and language variation: A minimalist perspective on parameters. Paper presented at the 9th Annual Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics, Keio University, Tokyo.Find this resource:

——— (2009a). From theoretical linguistics to biolinguistics: A different perspective of Minimalism. Fall class lectures, Seminaris CLT, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Find this resource:

——— (2009b). Language in cognition: Uncovering mental structures and the rules behind them. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— (2009c). The nature of merge: Consequences for language, mind, and biology. In Piattelli-Palmarini et al. (2009: 44–57).Find this resource:

——— (2009d). On the locus of asymmetry in UG. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 8, 41–53.Find this resource:

——— (2009e). Elementary syntactic structures: aminimalist inquiry. MS, ICREA/Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/001130Find this resource:

——— (2010). Linguistic minimalism. In B. Heine and H. Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammatical analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 485–505.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Approaching parameters from below. In A. M. Di Sciullo and C. Boeckx (eds.), Biolinguistic approaches to language evolution and variation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and K. K. Grohmann (2004). Sub Move: Towards a unified account of scrambling and D-linking. In D. Adger, C. de Cat, and G. Tsoulas (eds.), Peripheries: Syntactic edges and their effects. Kluwer: Dordrecht, 241–57.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2007). Putting phases in perspective. Syntax 10: 204–22.Find this resource:

——— and N. Hornstein (2003). Reply to ‘Control is not Movement’. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 269–80.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2004). Movement under Control. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 431–52.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2006). Control in Icelandic and theories of Control. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 591–606.Find this resource:

——— ——— and J. Nunes (2007). Overt copies in reflexive and Control structures: A movement analysis. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 1–46.Find this resource:

——— ——— ——— (2008). Copy-reflexive and Copy-control constructions: A movement analysis. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 8: 61–99.Find this resource:

——— ——— ——— (2010a). Icelandic Control really is A-movement: Reply to Bobaljik & Landau. Linguistic Inquiry 41: 111–30.Find this resource:

——— ——— ——— (2010b). Control as movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— and Y. Jeong (2004). The fine structure of intervention in syntax. In C. Kwon and W. Lee (eds.) (2004). Issues in current linguistic theory: A Festschrift for Hong Bae Lee, Kyunchin. Seoul: Kyungchin, 83–116.Find this resource:

——— and M. Piattelli-Palmarini (2005). Language as a natural object, linguistics as a natural science. Linguistic Review 22: 447–66.Find this resource:

——— and S. Stjepanović (2001). Head-ing towards PF. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 345–55.Find this resource:

Boolos, G. (1998). Logic, logic, and logic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Borer, H. (1984). Parametric syntax: Case studies in Semitic and Romance languages. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1994). The projection of arguments. In E. Benedicto and J. Runner (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 17. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts, 19–47.Find this resource:

——— (2005). The normal course of events (Structuring sense, vol. 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 649) Borsley, R. (1983). A note on the Generalized Left Branch Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 14: 169–74.Find this resource:

——— M.-L. Rivero and J. Stephens (1996). Long head movement in Breton. In R. Borsley and I. Roberts (eds.), The syntax of the Celtic languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 53–74.Find this resource:

Bošković, Ž. (1994). D-structure, Ë-theory, and movement into Ë-positions. Linguistic Analysis 24: 247–86.Find this resource:

——— (1997). The syntax of nonfinite complementation: An economy approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1999). On multiple feature-checking: Multiple wh-fronting and multiple headmovement. In S. Epstein and N. Hornstein (eds.), Working minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 159–87.Find this resource:

——— (2001). On the nature of the syntax–phonology interface: Cliticization and related phenomena. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Find this resource:

——— (2002a). A-movement and the EPP. Syntax 5: 167–218.Find this resource:

——— (2002b). On multiple wh-fronting. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 351–83.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Agree, phases, and intervention effects. Linguistic Analysis 33: 54–96.Find this resource:

——— (2004a). Topicalization, focalization, lexical insertion, and scrambling. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 613–38.Find this resource:

——— (2004b). Be careful where you float your quantifiers. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22: 681–742.Find this resource:

——— (2005). On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP. Studia Linguistica 59: 1–45.Find this resource:

——— (2007). On the locality and motivation of Move and Agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 589–644.Find this resource:

——— (2008a). On successive cyclic movement and the freezing effect of feature checking. In J. M. Hartmann, V. Hegedüs, and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), Sounds of silence: Empty elements in syntax and phonology. Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland, 195–233.Find this resource:

——— (2008b). What will you have, DP or NP? In E. Elfner and M. Walkow (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 37, vol. 1, 101–14.Find this resource:

——— (2008c). On the operator freezing effect. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26: 249–87.Find this resource:

——— (2009a). Unifying first and last conjunct agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27: 455–96.Find this resource:

——— (2009b). Review of Wh-movement: Moving on, ed. L. L.-S. Cheng and N. Corver. Language 85: 463–8.Find this resource:

——— (2010). On NPs and clauses. MS, University of Connecticut.Find this resource:

——— and H. Lasnik (1999). How strict is the cycle? Linguistic Inquiry 30: 691–703.Find this resource:

——— and J. Nunes (2007). The copy theory of movement: a view from PF. In N. Corver and J. Nunes (eds.), The Copy Theory of Movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–74.Find this resource:

——— and D. Takahashi (1998). Scrambling and last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 347–66.Find this resource:

Bowers, J. (1973). Grammatical relations. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1981). The theory of grammatical relations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1993). The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 591–656.Find this resource:

Brandom, R. (1994). Making it explicit. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Branigan, P. (1992). Subjects and complementizers. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

(p. 650) Brennan, V. (1991). Formal semantics of telegraphic speech. In B. Plunkett (ed.), Issues in psycholinguistics. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts.Find this resource:

Brenner, S. (2001). A life in science. London: BioMed Central.Find this resource:

Bresnan, J. W. (1971). Sentence stress and syntactic transformations. Language 47: 257–81.Find this resource:

——— (1971). On sentence stress and syntactic transformations. In M. Brame (ed.), Contributions to generative phonology. Austin: University of Texas Press, 73–107.Find this resource:

——— (1976). Evidence for a theory of unbounded transformations. Linguistic Analysis 2: 353–93.Find this resource:

Brody, M. (1995). Hungarian focus and bare checking theory. In I. Kohlhof, S. Winkler, and H. Drubig (eds.), Proceedings of the Göttingen Focus Workshop. Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereichs 340. University of Tubingen: Tubingen, 197–210.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Perfect chains. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 139–66.Find this resource:

——— (2000a). Mirror theory: syntactic representation in perfect syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 31.1: 29–56.Find this resource:

——— (2000b). Word order, restructuring, and mirror theory. In P. Svenonius (ed.), The derivation of VO and OV. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 27–43.Find this resource:

——— (2002). On the status of representations and derivations. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 19–41).Find this resource:

Reprinted in Brody (2003: 185–201).Find this resource:

——— (2003). Towards an elegant syntax. London: Routledge.Find this resource:

Bromberger, S., and M. Halle (1989). Why phonology is different. In A. Kasher (ed.), The Chomskyan turn. Oxford: Blackwell, 56–77.Find this resource:

Bruening, B. (2001). Syntax at the edge: Cross-clausal phenomena and the syntax of Passamaquoddy. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Buesa García, C. (forthcoming). The interaction between locality and the subject-gap restriction in Spanish questions. Proceedings of NELS 39.Find this resource:

Burge, T. (1973). Reference and proper names. Journal of Philosophy 70: 425–39.Find this resource:

Büring, D. 2005. Binding theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Burton, S. (1996). Past tense on nouns as death, destruction, and loss. In K. Kusumoto (ed.), Proceedings of NELS 27. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts, 65–78.Find this resource:

Bury, D. (2003). Phrase structure and derived heads. Ph.D. thesis, University College London.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Verb movement and VSO—VOS alternations. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 19.Find this resource:

Burzio, L. (1981). Intransitive verbs and Italian auxiliaries. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1986). Italian syntax: A Government–Binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.Find this resource:

——— (1991). The morphological basis of anaphora. Journal of Linguistics 27: 81–105.Find this resource:

Bush, R., and F. Mosteller (1951). Amathematicalmodel for simple learning. Psychological Review 68: 313–23.Find this resource:

Butt, M. (1995). The structure of complex predicates in Urdu. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Find this resource:

Bybee, J. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind's response to repetition. Language 82: 711–33.Find this resource:

Caballero, G., M. J. Houser, N. Marcus, T. McFarland, A. Pycha, M. Toosarvandani, and J. Nichols (2008). Nonsyntactic ordering effects in noun incorporation. Linguistic Typology 12: 383–421.Find this resource:

(p. 651) Cable, S. (2007). The grammar of Q: Q-particles and the nature of wh-fronting, as revealed by the wh-questions of Tlingit. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Caha, P. (2007). The shape of paradigms. MS, University of Tromsø.Find this resource:

Campbell, L. (2001). The history of linguistics. In M. Aronoff and J. Rees-Miller (eds.), The handbook of linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 81–104.Find this resource:

Cardinaletti, A. (1997). Agreement and control in expletive constructions. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 521–33Find this resource:

——— and M. Starke (1999). The typology of structural deficiency: On the three grammatical classes. In H. van Riemsdijk (ed.), Clitics in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 145–233.Find this resource:

Carlson, G. (1984). Thematic roles and their role in semantic interpretation. Linguistics 22: 259–79.Find this resource:

Carnie, A., H. Harley, and S. Dooley (eds.) (2005). Verb first: On the syntax of verb-initial languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Carroll, S. B. (2005). Endless forms most beautiful: The new science of Evo-Devo. New York: Norton.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, A. (1999). The origins of complex language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Ćavar, D., and G. Fanselow (1997). Split constituents in Germanic and Slavic. Paper presented at the International Conference on Pied-Piping, Friedrich-Schiller Universität, Jena.Find this resource:

——— and C. Wilder (1994). Long head movement? Verb movement and cliticization in Croatian. Lingua 93: 1–58.Find this resource:

Chametzky, R. (1995). Dominance, precedence, and parameterization. Lingua 96: 163–78.Find this resource:

——— (1996). A theory of phrase markers and the extended base. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Phrase structure: From GB to minimalism. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Phrase structure. In R. Hendrick (ed.), Minimalist syntax. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 192–225.Find this resource:

Chan, E. (2008). Distributional and structural basis on morphological learning. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia.Find this resource:

Chandra, P. (2007). (Dis)agree: Movement and agreement reconsidered. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

Chen-Main, J. (2006). On the generation and linearization of multi-dominance structures. Ph.D. thesis, Johns Hopkins University.Find this resource:

Cheng, L.-S. L. (2006). Decomposing Bantu relatives. In C. Davis, A. R. Deal, and Y. Zabbal (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 36. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts, 197–215.Find this resource:

Chesi, C. (2007). An introduction to phase-based minimalist grammars: Why move is topdown and from left-to-right. CISCL Working Papers on Language and Cognition 1: 38–75.Find this resource:

Chien, Y.-C., and K. Wexler (1990). Children's knowledge of locality conditions in binding as evidence for the modularity of syntax and pragmatics. Language Acquisition 1: 225–95.Find this resource:

Chierchia, G. (1992). Anaphora and dynamic binding. Linguistics and Philosophy 15: 111–83.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Reference to kinds. Natural Language Semantics 6: 339–405.Find this resource:

Chomsky, C. (1969). The acquisition of syntax in children from 5 to 10. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 652) Chomsky, N. (1951). Morphophonemics of modern Hebrew. Master's thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Find this resource:

——— (1955). The logical structure of linguistic theory. MS, Harvard University.Find this resource:

Revised 1956 version published in part by Plenum, 1975Find this resource:

;

University of Chicago Press, 1985.Find this resource:

——— (1956). Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions on Information Theory IT-2: 113–24.Find this resource:

Reprinted, with corrections, in R. D. Luce, R. Bush, and E. Galanter (eds.), Readings in mathematical psychology, vol. 2 (New York: Wiley, 1965), 105–24.Find this resource:

——— (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton. 2nd edn, Mouton de Gruyter, 2002.Find this resource:

——— (1958/1962). A transformational approach to syntax. Proceedings of the Third Texas Conference on Problems of Linguistic Analysis in English. Austin: University of Texas Press.Find this resource:

Reprinted in J. Fodor and J. Katz (eds.), The structure of language: readings in the philosophy of language (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1962), 211–45.Find this resource:

——— (1964a). The logical basis of linguistic theory. Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Linguistics. The Hague, Mouton, 914–78.Find this resource:

——— (1964b). Current issues in linguistic theory. In J. Fodor and J. Katz (eds.), The structure of language: readings in the philosophy of language (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1962), 50–118.Find this resource:

——— (1964c). Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

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

——— (1966). Cartesian linguistics. New York: Harper & Row.Find this resource:

——— (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In R. Jacobs and P. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham, MA: Ginn, 184–221.Find this resource:

——— (1973). Conditions on transformations. In S. R. Anderson and P. Kiparsky (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 232–86.Find this resource:

——— (1975a). The logical structure of linguistic theory. New York: Plenum Press.Find this resource:

——— (1975b). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.Find this resource:

——— (1975c). Questions of form and interpretation. Linguistic Analysis 1: 75–109.Find this resource:

——— (1976). Conditions on rules of grammar. Linguistic Analysis 2: 303–51.Find this resource:

——— (1977a). Essays on form and interpretation. New York: North-Holland.Find this resource:

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

——— (1979). The morphophonemics of modern Hebrew. New York: Garland.Find this resource:

——— (1980a). On binding. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 1–46.Find this resource:

——— (1980b). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1981a). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1981b). Principles and parameters in syntactic theory. In N. Hornstein and D. Lightfoot (eds.), Explanation in linguistics. London: Routledge, 32–75.Find this resource:

——— (1982a). Some concepts and consequences of the theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1982b). The generative enterprise: A discussion with Riny Huybregts and Henk van Riemsdijk. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1986a). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1986b). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.Find this resource:

——— (1988). Language and problems of knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 653) Chomsky, N. (1991). Some notes on economy of derivation and representation. In R. Freidin (ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 417–54.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Chomsky (1995b: 129–66).Find this resource:

——— (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Chomsky (1995b: 167–217).Find this resource:

——— (1995a). Bare phrase structure. In G. Webelhuth (ed.), Government and Binding theory and the minimalist program. Oxford: Blackwell, 385–439.Find this resource:

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

——— (1995c). Categories and transformations. In Chomsky (1995b: 219–394).Find this resource:

——— (1998). Some observations on economy in generative grammar. In P. Barbosa, D. Fox, P. Hagstrom, M. McGinnis, and D. Pesetsky (eds.), Is the best good enough? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 115–27.Find this resource:

——— (2000a). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels, and J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Minimalist essays in honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89–155.Find this resource:

——— (2000b). New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52.Find this resource:

——— (2002). On nature and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2004a). Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Belletti (2004b: 104–31).Find this resource:

——— (2004b). The generative enterprise revisited: A conversation with Riny Huybregts, Henk van Riemsdijk, Noaki Fukui, and Mihoko Zushi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

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

——— (2006). Language and mind. 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland and H.-M. Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view fromsyntax-semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter: 1–18.Find this resource:

——— (2008a). On phases. In R. Freidin, C. P. Otero, and M. L. Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 133–66.Find this resource:

——— (2008b). The biolinguistic program: Where does it stand today? MS, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (2010). Some simple Evo-Devo theses: How true might they be for language? In R. K. Larson, V. Déprez, and H. Yamakido (eds.), The evolution of human language: Biolinguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 45–62.Find this resource:

——— and M. Halle (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Find this resource:

——— ——— and F. Lukoff (1956). On accent and juncture in English. In For Roman Jakobson: Essays on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday. The Hague: Mouton, 65–80.Find this resource:

——— and H. Lasnik (1977). Filters and control. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1993). The theory of principles and parameters. In J. Jacobs, A. von Stechow, W. Sternefeld, and T. Vennemann (eds.), Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research, vol. 1. Berlin: de Gruyter, 506–69.Find this resource:

——— and G. A. Miller (1963). Introduction to the formal analysis of natural languages. In R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, and E. Galanter (eds.), Handbook of mathematical psychology, vol. 2. New York: Wiley, 269–321.Find this resource:

(p. 654) Chomsky, N., Rizzi L., and A. Belletti (2002). An interview on minimalism. In Chomsky (2002: 92–161).Find this resource:

——— and M. P. Schützenberger (1963). The algebraic theory of context-free languages. In P. Braffort and D. Hirschberg (eds.), Computer programming and formal systems. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 118–61.Find this resource:

Chung, S. (1998). The design of agreement: Evidence from Chamorro. University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

——— (2005). What fronts? On the VP raising account of verb-initial order. In A. Carnie, H. Harley, and S. A. Dooley (eds.), Verb-first: Papers from the Tucson workshop. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 9–29.Find this resource:

Church, A. (1941). The calculus of lambda conversion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Find this resource:

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

——— (1993). A null theory of phrase and compound stress. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 239–97.Find this resource:

——— (1994). On the evidence for partial N-movement in the Romance DP. In G. Cinque, J. Koster, J.-Y. Pollock, L. Rizzi, and R. Zanuttini (eds.), Paths towards universal grammar: Studies in honor of Richard S. Kayne. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 85–110.Find this resource:

——— (1999). Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (ed.) (2002). The structure of IP and DP: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2004). Issues in adverbial syntax. Lingua 114: 683–710.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Deriving Greenberg's Universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 315–32.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). The syntax of adjectives: A comparative study. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and R. Kayne (eds.) (2005). The Oxford handbook of comparative syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and L. Rizzi (2010). The cartography of syntactic structures. In B. Heine and H. Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 51–65.Find this resource:

Citko, B. (2000). Parallel Merge and the syntax of free relatives. Ph.D. thesis, Stony Brook University.Find this resource:

——— (2005). On the nature of Merge: External Merge, Internal Merge, and Parallel Merge. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 475–97.Find this resource:

——— (2006a). On the interaction between ATB wh-movement and left branch extraction. Syntax 9: 225–47.Find this resource:

——— (2006b). Determiner sharing from a crosslinguistic perspective. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2006: 73–96.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming a). How and why do questions linearize? In T. M. Biberauer and I. Roberts (eds.), Principles of linearization. Berlin: Mouton.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming b). A Parallel Merge solution to the Merchant/Johnson Paradox. In M. Uribe-Echevarria Goti and V. Valmala Elguea (eds.), Ways of structure building. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming c). Symmetry in syntax: Merge, Move and labels. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 655) Clark, E. V., and H. H. Clark. (1979). When nouns surface as verbs. Language 55: 767–811.Find this resource:

Clements, G. N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2: 225–52.Find this resource:

Cole, P., G. Hermon, and Y. Tjung (2008). A Binding Theory exempt anaphor in Javanese. In E. König and V. Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and typological exploration. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Collins, C. (1994). Topics in Ewe syntax. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Local economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Aspects of plurality in ╪ Hoan. Language 77: 456–76.Find this resource:

——— (2002a). Eliminating labels. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 42–64).Find this resource:

——— (2002b). Multiple verb movement in ╪ Hoan. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 1–29.Find this resource:

——— (2003). The internal structure of vP in Ju|′hoansi and ╪ Hoan. Studia Linguistica 57: 1–25.Find this resource:

——— and H. Ura (2001). Eliminating phrase structure. MS, Cornell University and Gwansei Gakuin University.Find this resource:

Compton, R., and C. Pittman (2010). Word-formation by phase in Inuit. Lingua 120, 2167–92.Find this resource:

Conroy, A., J. Lidz, E. Takahashi, and C. Phillips (2009). Equal treatment for all antecedents: How children succeed with Principle B. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 446–86.Find this resource:

Conwell, E., and K. Demuth (2007). Early syntactic productivity: Evidence from dative shift. Cognition 103: 163–79.Find this resource:

Coop, G., K. Bullaughey, F. Luca, and M. Przeworski (2008). The timing of selection at the human FOXP2 gene. Molecular Biology and Evolution 25: 1257–9.Find this resource:

Cormen, T. H., C. E. Leiserson, and R. L. Rivest (1991). Introduction to algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Corver, N., and J. Nunes (eds.) (2007). The Copy Theory of Movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

——— and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.) (1994). Studies on scrambling: Movement and nonmovement approaches to free word-order phenomena. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Covington, M. (1984). Syntactic theory in the high medieval ages: Modisticmodels of sentence structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Crain, S., and P. Pietroski (2001). Nature, nurture, and universal grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 24: 139–86.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Why language acquisition is a snap. Linguistic Review 19: 163–83.Find this resource:

——— and R. Thornton (1998). Investigations in universal grammar: A guide to experiments in the acquisition of syntax and semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Cresti, D. (1995). Extraction and reconstruction. Natural Language Semantics 3: 79–122.Find this resource:

Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cruschina, S. (2008). Discourse-related features and the syntax of peripheral positions: A comparative study of Sicilian and other Romance languages. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.Find this resource:

Culicover, P., and R. Jackendoff (2005). Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and M. Rochemont (1983). Stress and Focus in English. Language 59: 123–65.Find this resource:

Danto, A. (1987). Mysticism and morality. New York: Columbia University Press. Originally published by Basic Books, 1972.Find this resource:

(p. 656) Davidson, D. (1967). The logical form of action sentences. In N. Rescher (ed.), The logic of decision and action. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 81–95.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Subjective, intersubjective, objective. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Davies, M. (1987). Tacit knowledge and semantic theory: Can a five per cent difference matter? Mind 96: 441–62.Find this resource:

Dawkins, R. (1986). The blind watchmaker: Why the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design. New York: Norton.Find this resource:

——— (1996). Climbing Mount Improbable. New York: Norton.Find this resource:

Degener, A. (1998). Die Sprache von Nisheygram im afghanischen Hindukusch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Find this resource:

Demirdache, H., and M. Oiry (2008). On the syntax and semantics of long-distance questions in child French. In A. Gavarró and M. João Freitas (eds.), Language acquisition and development: proceedings of GALA 2007. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 177–88.Find this resource:

Demuth, K., and S. Mmusi (1997). Presentational focus and thematic structure. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 18: 1–19.Find this resource:

den Besten, H. (1981). On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 20: 1–78.Find this resource:

——— (1983). On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. In W. Abraham (ed.), On the formal syntax of Westgermania. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 47–131.Find this resource:

——— and J. A. Edmondson (1981). The verbal complex in Continental West Germanic. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 19: 11–61.Find this resource:

——— and G. Webelhuth (1990). Stranding. In G. Grewendorf and W. Sternefeld (eds.), Scrambling and barriers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 77–92.Find this resource:

den Dikken, M. (2005). A comment on the topic of topic–comment. Lingua 115: 691–710.Find this resource:

——— (2007a). Phase extensions: Contours of a theory of the role of head movement in phrasal extraction. Theoretical Linguistics 33: 1–41.Find this resource:

——— (2007b). Phase extensions: A reply. Theoretical Linguistics 33: 133–66.Find this resource:

Dennett, D. (1995). Darwin's dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon & Schuster.Find this resource:

dʼErrico, F., C. Henshilwood, M. Vanhaeren, and K. Van Niekerk (2005). Nassarius kraussianus shell beads from Blombos Cave: Evidence for symbolic behaviour in the Middle Stone Age. Journal of Human Evolution 48: 3–24.Find this resource:

de Villiers, J., P. de Villiers, and T. Roeper (2007). What's in a phase? MS., Smith College/University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

——— T. Roeper, and A. Vainikka (1990). The acquisition of long-distance rules. In L. Frazier and J. de Villiers (eds.), Language processing and language acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 257–97.Find this resource:

——— ——— ——— (forthcoming). Handbook of generative approaches to acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

De Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian: the minimal chain principle. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Devitt, M., and K. Sterelny (1987). Language and reality. Oxford: Blackwell. 2nd edn 1999.Find this resource:

de Vries, M. (2007). Invisible constituents? Parentheses as B-merged adverbial phrases. In N. Dehé and Y. Kavalova (eds.), Parentheticals. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 203–34.Find this resource:

——— (2009). On multidominance and linearization. Biolinguistics 3: 344–403.Find this resource:

Diesing, M. (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 657) Di Sciullo, A. M. (2004). Morphological phases. In Generative grammar in a broader perspective: the 4th GLOW in Asia. Seoul, 113–37.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Asymmetry in morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and C. Boeckx (forthcoming). Introduction: Contours of the biolinguistic research agenda. In A. M. di Sciullo and C. Boeckx (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and E. Williams (1987). On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Dobashi, Y. (2003). Phonological phrasing and syntactic derivation. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University.Find this resource:

Doherty, C. (1993). The syntax of subject contact relatives. MS, University of California, Santa Cruz.Find this resource:

Donati, C. (2006). On wh-head movement. In L. Cheng and N. Corver (eds.), Whmovement: Moving on. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 21–46.Find this resource:

Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague Grammar. Boston: Reidel.Find this resource:

——— (1989). On the semantic content of the notion thematic role. In B. Partee, G. Chierchia, and R. Turner (eds.), Properties, types and meaning. Dordrecht: Reidel, 69–129.Find this resource:

——— (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547–619.Find this resource:

——— and P. Jacobson (1989). Agreement as a semantic phenomenon. Proceedings of the 5th Annual Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL). Columbus: Ohio State University, 95–108.Find this resource:

Dresher, E. (1999). Charting the learning path: Cues to parameter setting. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 27–67.Find this resource:

——— and J. Kaye (1990). A computational learning model for metrical phonology. Cognition 34: 137–95.Find this resource:

Drozd, K. F. (2001). Children's weak interpretation of universally quantified sentences. In M. Bowerman and S. Levinson (eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 340–76.Find this resource:

Dyła, S. (1984). Across the board dependencies and case in Polish. Linguistic Inquiry 15: 701–5.Find this resource:

Eens, M., R. Pinxten, and R. F. Verheyen (1992). Song learning in captive European starlings. Animal Behaviour 44: 1131–43.Find this resource:

Elbourne, P. (2005a). On the acquisition of Principle B. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 333–65.Find this resource:

——— (2005b). Situations and individuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Find this resource:

Embick, D. (2007). Blocking effects and analytic/synthetic alternations. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25: 1–37.Find this resource:

——— (2008a). Variation and morphosyntactic theory: Competition fractioned. Language and Linguistics Compass 2: 59–78.Find this resource:

——— (2008b). Localism vs. globalism in morphology and phonology. MS, University of Pennsylvania.Find this resource:

——— and R. Noyer (2001). Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 555–96.Find this resource:

Emonds, J. (1971). Root, structure-preserving and local transformations. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1976). A transformational approach to English syntax: Root, structure-preserving and local transformations. New York: Academic Press.Find this resource:

——— (1978). The verbal complex V_-V in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9: 151–75.Find this resource:

——— (1985). A unified theory of syntactic categories. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Lexicon and grammar: The English syntacticon. Mouton: Berlin.Find this resource:

(p. 658) Enard, W., M. Przeworki, S. E. Fischer, C. S. L. Lai, V. Wiebe, T. Kitano, A. P. Monaco, and S. Pääbo (2002). Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech and language. Nature 418: 868–72.Find this resource:

Epstein, J. M. (1998). Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity 4: 41–60.Find this resource:

Epstein, S. D. (1999). UN-principled syntax: The derivation of syntactic relations. In S. D. Epstein and N. Hornstein (eds.), Working minimalism. 317–345. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 317–45.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Epstein (2000: 183–210).Find this resource:

——— (2000). Essays in syntactic theory. New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

——— (2007a). On I(nternalist)-functional explanation inminimalism. Linguistic Analysis 33: 20–53.Find this resource:

——— (2007b). Physiological linguistics, and some implications regarding disciplinary autonomy and unification. Mind and Language 22: 44–67.Find this resource:

E. Groat, R. Kawashima, and H. Kitahara (1998). A derivational approach to syntactic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— H. Kitahara, and T. D. Seely (2008). The value of phonological underspecification in the narrow syntax. MS, University of Michigan, Keio University, and Eastern Michigan University. Presented at Carson-Newman College (Exploring Crash-Proof Grammars, February 29, 2008), and at Michigan State University (Linguistics Department Colloquium Series, February 7, 2008).Find this resource:

——— A. Pires, and T. D. Seely (2004). EPP in T: More controversial subjects. Syntax 8: 65–80.Find this resource:

——— and T. D. Seely (1999). SPEC-ifying the GF subject: Eliminating A-chains and the EPP within a derivational model. MS, University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2002a). Introduction: On the quest for explanation. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 1–18).Find this resource:

——— ——— (2002b). Rule applications as cycles in a level-free syntax. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 65–89).Find this resource:

——— ——— (eds.) (2002c). Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2006). Derivations in minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Ernst, T. (2002). The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Evans, G. (1981). Semantic theory and tacit knowledge. In S. Holtzman and C. Leich (eds.), Wittgenstein: To follow a rule. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Find this resource:

Everaert, M. (1986). The syntax of reflexivization. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

Evers, A. (1975). The transformational cycle in Dutch and German. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht.Find this resource:

Fabregas, A. (2007). The exhaustive lexicalization principle. Nordlyd 34: 165–99.Find this resource:

Fanselow, G. (2006). Partial wh-movement. In M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk with R. Goedemans and B. Hollebrandse (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 3. Oxford: Blackwell, 437–92.Find this resource:

——— and A. Mahajan (2000). Towards a minimalist theory of wh-expletives, wh-copying, and successive cyclicity. In U. Lutz, G. Müller, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Wh-scope marking. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 195–230.Find this resource:

Ferland, R. J., T. J. Cherry, P. O. Preware, E. E. Morrisey, and C. A. Walhs (2003). Characterization of FOXP2 and FOXP1 ARNm and protein in the developing and mature brain. Journal of Comparative Neurology 460: 266–79.Find this resource:

(p. 659) Fiengo, R. (1974). Semantic conditions on surface structure. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

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

Fillmore, C. J. (1963). The position of embedding transformations in a grammar. Word 19: 208–31.Find this resource:

Fitch, W. T., M. D. Hauser, and N. Chomsky (2005). The evolution of the language faculty: clarifications and implications. Cognition 97: 179–210.Find this resource:

Fitzgibbons, N. (2010). Freestanding N-words in Russian: A syntactic account. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 18: 55–99.Find this resource:

Fitzpatrick, J. (2002). On minimalist approaches to the locality of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 443–63.Find this resource:

Fodor, J. A. (1970). Three reasons for not deriving kill from cause to die. Linguistic Inquiry 1: 429–38.Find this resource:

——— (1975). The language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1986). Psychosemantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1990). A theory of content and other essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2000). The mind doesn't work that way. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Language, thought, and compositionality. Mind and Language 16: 1–15.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Hume variations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and E. Lepore (1998). The emptiness of the lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 429–38.Find this resource:

——— and Z. W. Pylyshyn (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition 28: 3–71.Find this resource:

Fodor, J. D. (1998). Unambiguous triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 1–36.Find this resource:

——— and S. Crain (1987). Simplicity and generality of rules in language acquisition. In B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 35–63.Find this resource:

Folli, R. (2002). Constructing telicity in English and Italian. Ph.D. thesis, University of Oxford.Find this resource:

——— and H. Harley (2004). Flavors of v: Consuming results in Italian and English. In R. Slabakova and P. Kempchinsky (eds.), Aspectual inquiries. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 95–120.Find this resource:

——— ——— and S. Karimi (2005). Determinants of event type in Persian complex predicates. Lingua 115: 1365–401.Find this resource:

Fortuny, J. (2008). The emergence of order in syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

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

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

——— (2000). Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Antecedent contained deletion and the copy theory of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 63–96.Find this resource:

——— (2003). On logical form. In R. Hendrick (ed.), Minimalist syntax. Oxford: Blackwell, 82–123.Find this resource:

——— and H. Lasnik (2003). Successive cyclic movement and island repair: The difference between sluicing and VP Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 143–54.Find this resource:

——— and J. Nissenbaum (1999). Extraposition and scope: A case for overt QR. In S. Bird, A. Carnie, J. D. Haugen, and P. Norquest (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 132–44.Find this resource:

——— and D. Pesetsky (2004). Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics 31: 1–46.Find this resource:

(p. 660) Fox, D., and D. Pesetsky (2007). Cyclic linearization of shared material. Talk given at Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung (ZAS), Berlin, April.Find this resource:

Frampton, J. (1990). Parasitic gaps and the theory of wh-chains. Linguistic Inquiry 21: 49–77.Find this resource:

——— and S. Gutmann (2000). Agreement is feature sharing. MS, Northeastern University.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2001). How sentences grow in the mind: Efficient computation in minimalist syntax. MS, Northeastern University.Find this resource:

[A version published as How sentences grow in the mind: Agreement and selection in efficient minimalist syntax, in

C. Boeckx (ed.), Agreement systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 121–57.]Find this resource:

——— ——— (2002). Crash-proof syntax. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 90–105).Find this resource:

Franck, J., G. Lassi, U. Frauenfelder, and L. Rizzi (2006). Agreement and movement: A syntactic analysis of attraction. Cognition 101: 173–216.Find this resource:

Frank, R. (1998). Structural complexity and the time course of grammatical development. Cognition 66: 249–301.Find this resource:

Franks, S. (1993). On parallelism in across-the-board dependencies. Linguistic Inquiry 4: 509–29.Find this resource:

——— (1995). Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Clitics in Slavic. Position paper presented at the Comparative Slavic Morphosyntax Workshop, June 5–7, Bloomington, IN. Available from: http://www.indiana.edu/∼slavconf/linguistics/index.htmlFind this resource:

——— (2002). A Jakobsonian feature based analysis of the Slavic numeric quantifier genitive. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10: 141–82.Find this resource:

——— and Ž. Bošković (2001). An argument for multiple Spell-Out. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 174–83.Find this resource:

Frascarelli, M. (2007). Subjects, topics, and the interpretation of referential pro. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25: 691–734.Find this resource:

——— and R. Hinterhoelzl (2007). Types of topics in German and Italian. In S. Winkler and K. Schwabe (eds.), On information structure: Meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 87–116.Find this resource:

Frauenfelder, U., J. Segui, and J. Mehler (1980). Monitoring around the relative clause. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19: 328–37.Find this resource:

Freeze, R. (1992). Existentials and other locatives. Language 68: 553–95.Find this resource:

Frege, G. (1884). Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik. Breslau: Koebner.Find this resource:

Translated by J. L. Austin, The foundations of arithmetic (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974).Find this resource:

——— (1980[1892]). Function and concept. In P. Geach and M. Black (trans.), Translations from the philosophical writings of Gottlob Frege. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Freidin, R. (1975). The analysis of passives. Language 51: 384–405.Find this resource:

——— (1978). Cyclicity and the theory of grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 9: 519–49.Find this resource:

——— (1986). Fundamental issues in the theory of binding. In B. Lust (ed.), Studies in the acquisition of anaphora. Dordrecht: Reidel, 151–88.Find this resource:

——— (1994). Conceptual shifts in the science of grammar: 1951–1992. In C. Otero (ed.), Noam Chomsky: Critical assessments, vol. 1. London, Routledge, 653–90.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Review of Noam Chomsky, the Minimalist program. Language 73.3: 571–82.Find this resource:

——— and J.-R. Vergnaud (2001). Exquisite connections: Some remarks on the evolution of linguistic theory. Lingua 111: 639–66.Find this resource:

Friedmann, N., A. Belletti, and L. Rizzi (2008). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A_-dependencies. Lingua 119: 67–88.Find this resource:

(p. 661) Fujii, T. (2007). Cyclic chain reduction. In N. Corver and J. Nunes (eds.), The copy theory of movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 291–326.Find this resource:

Fujita, E., Y. Tanabe, A. Shiota, M. Ueda, K. Suwa, M. Y. Momoi, and T. Momoi (2008). Ultrasonic vocalization impairment of Foxp2 (R552H) knockin mice related to speechlanguage disorder and abnormality of Purkinje cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105: 3117–22.Find this resource:

Fujita, K. (2007). Kaiki-sei kara mieru bunpou-no hattatu to sinka [The development and evolution of grammar in light of recursion]. Gengo 36: 16–24.Find this resource:

Fukui, N. (1986). A theory of category projection and its applications. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Revised version published as Theory of projection in syntax (Stanford, CA: CSLI, 1995).Find this resource:

——— (1995). The principles-and-parameters approach: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. In M. Shibatani and T. Bynon (eds.), Approaches to language typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 327–72.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Fukui (2006: 100–131).Find this resource:

——— (1998). Kyokusyoo-moderu-no tenkai: Gengo-no setumei-riron-o mezasite [The development of a minimalist program: Toward a truly explanatory theory of language]. In Y. Takubo, T. Inada, S. Tonoike, H. Nakajima, and N. Fukui, Generative grammar. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 161–210.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Phrase structure. In M. Baltin and C. Collins (eds.), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 374–406.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Fukui (2006: 258–88).Find this resource:

——— (ed.) (2003). Formal Japanese syntax and universal grammar: The past 20 Years. Lingua Special Issue (113.4–6).Find this resource:

——— (2004). Broca's aphasics: A generative approach. Paper presented at the Sophia International Workshop on Speech Pathology, Sophia University, Tokyo.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Embed. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Formal Linguistics, Hunan University, Changsha.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Theoretical comparative syntax: Studies in macroparameters. London: Routledge.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Gengo-no kihon enzan-o meguru oboegaki [Some notes on the basic operations in human language]. In Y. Kaneko, A. Kikuchi, D. Takahashi, Y. Ogawa, and E. Shima (eds.), Gengo-kenkyu no Genzai [The State of the Art in Linguistic Research]. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, 1–21.Find this resource:

——— and H. Sakai (2003). The visibility guideline for functional categories: Verb raising in Japanese and related issues. Lingua 113: 321–75.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Fukui (2006: 289–336).Find this resource:

——— and M. Speas (1986). Specifiers and projection. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 128–72.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Fukui (2006: 9–37).Find this resource:

——— and Y. Takano (1998). Symmetry in syntax: Merge and Demerge. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 7: 27–86.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Fukui (2006: 132–78).Find this resource:

——— and M. Zushi (2003). Yakusya-niyoru Zyosetu [Translator's introduction]. In the Japanese translation of Chomsky (2004b: 1–34). Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2004). Introduction. [Abridged English translation of Fukui and Zushi 2003.] In Chomsky (2004b: 1–25).Find this resource:

Fukushima, K (2003). Verb-raising and numeral quantifiers in Japanese: Incompatible bedfellows. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 12: 313–47.Find this resource:

Gallego, Á. J. (2007). Phase theory and parametric variation. Ph.D. thesis, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Phases and variation: Exploring the second factor of the language faculty. MS, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Find this resource:

(p. 662) Gallistel, C. R. (2009). The foundational abstractions. In Piattelli-Palmarini et al. (2009: 58–73).Find this resource:

Gardner, R. A., B. T. Gardner, and T. E. Van Cantford (eds.) (1989). Teaching sign language to chimpanzees. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Find this resource:

Gärtner, H.-M. (1998). Review of Nunes (1995). GLOT International 8.3: 16–20.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Generalized transformations and beyond: Reflections on Minimalist syntax. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Find this resource:

——— and J. Michaelis (2005). A note on the complexity of constraint interaction. In Logical aspects of computational linguistics. New York: Springer, 114–30.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2007). Some remarks on locality conditions and minimalist grammars. In U. Sauerland and H.-M. Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 161–97.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2008). A note on countercyclicity and minimalist grammars. In G. Penn (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Formal Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 95–109.Find this resource:

Gavruseva, E., and R. Thornton (1999). Possessor extraction in child English: A minimalist account. Paper presented at the Penn Linguistics Colloquium.Find this resource:

Gazdar, G., E. Klein, G. Pullum, and I. Sag (1985). Generalized phrase structure grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Gentner, T. Q., K. M. Fenn, D. Margoliash, and H. C. Nusbaum (2006). Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440: 1204–7.Find this resource:

Geurts, B. (2004). Weak and strong reflexives in Dutch. In P. Schlenker and E. Keenan (eds.), Proceedings of the ESSLLI workshop on semantic approaches to binding theory, Nancy, France.Find this resource:

Giannakidou, A. (1997). The landscape of polarity items. Ph.D thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.Find this resource:

——— (2006). N-words and negative concord. In M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk with R. Goedemans and B. Hollebrandse (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 3. Oxford: Blackwell, 327–91.Find this resource:

Gianollo, C., C. Guardiano, and G. Longobardi (2008). Three fundamental issues in parametric linguistics. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 109–42.Find this resource:

Gibson, E., and K. Wexler (1994). Triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 355–407.Find this resource:

Gillon, B. (1987). Readings of plural noun phrases in English. Linguistics and Philosophy 102: 199–219.Find this resource:

Ginsburg, S., and S. Greibach (1969). Abstract families of languages. Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society 87: 1–32.Find this resource:

Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Golston, C. (1995). Syntax outranks phonology: Evidence from Ancient Greek. Phonology 12: 343–68.Find this resource:

Gomez, R., and L. A. Gerken (2000). Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4: 178–86.Find this resource:

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

Goodall, J. (1986). The chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of behavior. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Find this resource:

Goodluck, H. (1978). Linguistic principles in children's grammar of complement subject interpretation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

(p. 663) Goodman, J (1999). Semiring parsing. Computational Linguistics 254: 573–605.Find this resource:

Gould, S. J. (2002). The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Find this resource:

Gračanin-Yüksek, M. (2007). About sharing. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Greenberg, J. H. (1957). The nature and uses of linguistic typologies. International Journal of American Linguistics 23: 68–77.Find this resource:

——— (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 73–113.Find this resource:

——— (1978). Typology and cross-linguistic generalization. In J. H. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson, and E. A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of human language, vol. 1: Method and theory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 33–59.Find this resource:

Grewendorf, G., and J. Kremers (2009). Phases and cycles: Some problems with phase theory. Linguistic Review 26: 385–430.Find this resource:

——— and W. Sternefeld (1990). Scrambling and barriers. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Find this resource:

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

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3. New York: Academic Press, 41–58.Find this resource:

——— (1989). Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Grillo, N. (2005). Minimality effects in agrammatic comprehension. In S. Blaho, E. Schoorlemmer, and L. Vicente (eds.), Proceedings of ConSOLE XIII, 106–20.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Generalized minimality: syntactic underspecification in Broca's aphasia. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht.Find this resource:

Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1991). Extended projections. MS, Brandeis University.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Projection, heads and optimality. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 373–422.Find this resource:

Groat, E. M., and J. OʼNeil (1996). Spell-Out at the LF interface. In W. Abraham, S. D. Epstein, H. Thráinsson, and C. J.-W. Zwart (eds.), Minimal ideas: Syntactic studies in the minimalist framework. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 113–39.Find this resource:

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

Grohmann, K. K. (2000a). Copy left dislocation. In R. Billerey and B. D. Lillehaugen (eds.), Proceedings of 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 139–52.Find this resource:

——— (2000b). Prolific peripheries: A radical view from the left. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Natural relations: A note on X-structure. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 21: 67–87.Find this resource:

——— (2003a). Successive cyclicity under (anti-)local considerations. Syntax 6: 260–312.Find this resource:

——— (2003b). Prolific domains: On the anti-locality of movement dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Pied-piping, feature movement, and wh-subjects. In L. L.-S. Cheng and N. Corver (eds.), Wh-movement: Moving on. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 249–88.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Transfer vs. Spell-Out and the road to PF. Linguistic Analysis 33: 176–94.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Phases and interfaces. In K. K. Grohmann (ed.), Interphases: Phase-theoretic investigations of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–22.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming a). Spell-out rules. In H. Broekhuis and R. Vogel (eds.), Derivation and filtering. London: Equinox.Find this resource:

(p. 664) Grohmann, K. K. (forthcoming b). Copy spell-out. In P. Brandt and F. Fuß (eds.), Repairs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

——— and L. Haegeman (2003). Resuming reflexives. Nordlyd 31: 46–62.Find this resource:

——— and A. I. Nevins (2005). On the expression of pejorative mood. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 4, 143–79.Find this resource:

——— and E. P. Panagiotidis (2005). An anti-locality approach to Greek demonstratives. In L. Brugè, G. Giusti, N. Munaro, W. Schweikert, and G. Turano (eds.), Contributions to the Thirtieth Incontro di Grammatica Generativa. Venice: Università Ca Foscari, Venezia, Department of Language Sciences/ATTI 2, 243–63.Find this resource:

——— and M. T. Putnam (2007). Prosodic stress assignment in dynamic computations. Linguistic Analysis 33: 326–63.Find this resource:

Gropen, J., S. Pinker, M. Hollander, R. Goldberg, and R. Wilson (1989). The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English. Language 65: 203–57.Find this resource:

Gruber, J. S. (1965). Studies in lexical relations. Ph.D thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Guillaumin, M. (2004). Conversions between mildly sensitive grammars. MS, University of California, Los Angeles, and École Normale Supérieure, Paris. http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/stabler/epssw.htmFind this resource:

Guimarães, M. M. (2004). Derivation and representation of syntactic amalgams. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

Gutierrez, M. J. (2005). The acquisition of English LD wh-questions by Basque/Spanish bilingual subjects in a school context. Ph.D. thesis, University of the Basque Country.Find this resource:

Haddad, Y. A. (2007). Adjunct control in Telugu and Assamese. Ph.D. thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville.Find this resource:

Haeberli, E. (2002). Features, categories and the syntax of A-positions: Cross-linguistic variation in the Germanic languages. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Haegeman, L. (1991). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— and T. Lohndal (2010). Negative concord and (multiple) Agree: A case study of West Flemish. Linguistic Inquiry 41: 181–211.Find this resource:

——— and H. van Riemsdijk (1986). Verb projection raising, scope, and the typology of rules affecting verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 417–66.Find this resource:

——— and R. Zanuttini (1991). Negative heads and the NEG criterion. Linguistic Review 8.2–4: 233–51.Find this resource:

Haesler, S., C. Rochefort, B. Georgi, P. Licznerski, P. Osten, and C. Scharff (2007). Incomplete and inaccurate vocal imitation after knockdown of FoxP2 in songbird Basal Ganglia Nucleus Area X. PLoS Biology 5.12: e321.Find this resource:

Hagstrom, P. (1998). Decomposing questions. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Hale, J (2003). Grammar, uncertainty, and sentence processing. Ph.D. thesis, Johns Hopkins University.Find this resource:

Hale, K. L. (1998). A note on the Pittapitta nominative case and the future tense. MS, MIT.Find this resource:

——— and S. J. Keyser (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In K. L. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 53–109.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1998). The basic elements of argument structure. In H. Harley (ed.), Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on Argument Structure and Aspect. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 32: 73–118.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2002). Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 665) Hale, M., and C. Reiss (2000a). Phonology as cognition. In N. Burton-Roberts, P. Carr, and G. Docherty (eds.), Phonological knowledge: Conceptual and empirical issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 161–84.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2000b). Substance abuse and dysfunctionalism: Current trends in phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 157–69.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2008). The phonological enterprise. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Hall, B. K. (1999). Evolutionary developmental biology, 2nd edn. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Find this resource:

——— and W. M. Olson (eds.) (2003). Keywords and concepts in evolutionary developmental biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Halle, M. (1981). Knowledge unlearned and untaught: What speakers know about the sounds of their language. In M. Halle, J. Bresnan, and G. A. Miller (eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 294–303.Find this resource:

——— (1995). Feature geometry and feature spreading. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 1–46.Find this resource:

——— and A. Marantz (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. L. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 111–76.Find this resource:

——— and K. N. Stevens (1962). Speech recognition: A model and a program for research. IRE Transactions of the PGIT IT-8: 155–9.Find this resource:

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

Halpern, A. (1992). Approaching second. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Hamann, C. (forthcoming). Binding and coreference: Views from child language. In J. de Villiers and T. Roeper (eds.), Handbook of generative approaches to language acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Harbour, D. (2007). Morphosemantic number. New York: Springer.Find this resource:

Harkema, H. (2000). A recognizer for minimalist grammars. In Sixth International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, IWPT00, 251–68.Find this resource:

——— (2001a). A characterization of minimalist languages. In P. de Groote, G. Morrill, and C. Retoré (eds.), Logical aspects of computational linguistics. Dordrecht: Springer, 193–211.Find this resource:

——— (2001b). Parsing minimalist languages. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Find this resource:

Harley, H. (1995). Subjects, events and licensing. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Possession and the double object construction. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2: 29–68.Find this resource:

——— (2005). How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, manner incorporation and the ontology of verb roots in English. In N. Erteschik-Shir and T. Rapoport (eds.), The syntax of aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 42–64.Find this resource:

——— (2008a). On the causative construction. In S. Miyagawa and M. Saito (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Japanese linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 20–53.Find this resource:

——— (2008b). Bare roots, conflation, and the canonical use constraint. NORMS workshop on argument structure, University of Lund, Feb. 6.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Lexical decomposition in modern generative grammar. In W. Hinzen, M. Werning, and E. Machery (eds.), Handbook of compositionality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (in preparation). There really are no agent-V idioms. MS, University of Arizona.Find this resource:

——— and R. Noyer (1999). Distributed morphology. Glot International 4: 3–9.Find this resource:

(p. 666) Harley, H., and R. Noyer (2000). Licensing in the non-lexicalist lexicon: Nominalizations, vocabulary items and the encyclopedia. In B. Peeters (ed.), The lexicon–encyclopedia interface. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 349–74.Find this resource:

——— and E. Ritter (2002). Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78: 482–526.Find this resource:

Harris, Z. (1951). Methods in structural linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

——— (1957). Co-occurrence and transformation in linguistic structure. Language 33: 283–340.Find this resource:

Reprinted in J. A. Fodor and J. Katz (eds.), The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy of language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 155–210.Find this resource:

Hauser, M. D. (1996). The evolution of communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— N. Chomsky, and W. T. Fitch (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298: 1569–79.Find this resource:

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

Heck, F. (2004). A theory of pied-piping. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Tübingen.Find this resource:

——— (2009). On certain properties of pied-piping. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 75–111.Find this resource:

——— and G. Müller (2000). Successive cyclicity, long-distance superiority, and local optimization. In R. Billerey and B.D. Lillehaugen (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 19. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 218–31.Find this resource:

Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Published in 1989 by Garland, New York.Find this resource:

——— and A. Kratzer (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Hempel, C. (1965[1959]). The logic of functional analysis. In Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays. New York: Free Press, 297–331.Find this resource:

Henderson, B. (2007). The syntax of agreement in Bantu relatives. In F. Hoyt, N. Seifert, A. Teodorescu, and J. White (eds.), The morphosyntax of underrepresented languages. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 167–84.Find this resource:

Hendriks, P., and J. Spenader (2006). When production precedes comprehension: An optimization approach to the acquisition of pronouns. Language Acquisition 13: 319–48.Find this resource:

Henry, A. (1995). Belfast English and Standard English: Dialect variation and parameter setting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Henshilwood, C. S., F. dʼErrico, R. Yates, Z. Jacobs, C. Tribolo, G. A. Duller, N. Mercier, J. C. Sealy, H. Valladas, I. Watts, and A. G. Wintle (2002). Emergence of modern human behaviour: Middle Stone Age engravings from South Africa. Science 295: 1278–80.Find this resource:

Heny, F. (1981). Introduction. In F. Heny (ed.), Binding and filtering. London: Croom Helm, 1–45.Find this resource:

Herrnstein, R., and D. Loveland (1975). Maximizing and matching on concurrent ratio schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 24: 107–16.Find this resource:

Higginbotham, J. (1983). The logical form of perceptual reports. Journal of Philosophy 80: 100–127.Find this resource:

——— (1985). On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 547–93.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Accomplishments. MS, Oxford University.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Remarks on compositionality. In G. Ramchand and C. Reiss (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 425–44.Find this resource:

——— and R. May (1981). Questions, quantifiers and crossing. Linguistic Review 1: 41–79.Find this resource:

Hill, J. C., and A. Wayne (1991). A CYK approach to parsing in parallel: A case study. In Proceedings of The Twenty-Second SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 240–45.Find this resource:

(p. 667) Hinterhölzl, R. (2006). The phase condition and cyclic spell-out: Evidence from VP-topicalization. In M. Frascarelli (ed.), Phases of interpretation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 237–59.Find this resource:

Hinzen, W. (2003). Truth's fabric. Mind and Language 18: 194–219Find this resource:

——— (2006). Mind design and minimal syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2007). An essay on names and truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2009a). The successor function + LEX = human language? In K. K. Grohmann (ed.), Interphases: phase-theoretic investigations of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 25–47.Find this resource:

——— (2009b). Hierarchy, Merge, and truth. In Piattelli-Palmarini et al. (2009: 123–41).Find this resource:

Hiraiwa, K. (2001). Multiple Agree and the Defective Intervention Constraint in Japanese. In O. Matsushansky et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the MIT-Harvard Joint Conference (HUMIT 2000), Cambridge, MA, 67–80.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Eliminating PBC: Multiple Spell-Out, scrambling and the edge operation. Proceedings of the 26th Penn Linguistics Colloquium (University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 9.1). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 89–103.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: Agreement and clausal architecture. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— and A. Bodomo (2008). Object sharing as symmetric sharing: Predicate clefting and serial verbs in Dagaare. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26: 795–832.Find this resource:

Hirschbühler, P. (1982). VP-deletion and across-the-board quantifier scope. In J. Pustejovsky and P. Sells (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 12, 132–9.Find this resource:

Hofstadter, D. (2007). I am a strange loop. New York: Basic Books.Find this resource:

Hoji, H. (1985). Logical form constraints and configurational structures in Japanese. Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.Find this resource:

——— (2009). A foundation of generative grammar as an empirical science. MS, University of Southern California.Find this resource:

Hollebrandse, B., and T. Roeper (1997). The concept of DO-insertion and the theory of INFL in acquisition. Amsterdam Child Language Series, eds. C. Koster and F. Wynen.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2007). Recursion and propositional exclusivity. MS, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

——— ——— (forthcoming). Recursion and acquisition. Proceedings of Recursion Conference, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

Holmberg, A. (1986). Word order and syntactic features in the Scandinavian languages and English. Ph.D. thesis, University of Stockholm.Find this resource:

——— (2000a). Deriving OV order in Finnish. In P. Svenonius (ed.), The derivation of VO and OV. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 123–52.Find this resource:

——— (2000b). Scandinavian stylistic fronting: How any category can become an expletive. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 445–83.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Is there a little Pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 533–64.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Parameters in minimalist theory: The case of Scandinavian. MS, University of Newcastle.Find this resource:

——— and T. Hróarsdóttir (2003). Agreement and movement in Icelandic raising constructions. Lingua 113: 997–1019.Find this resource:

——— and C. Platzack (1995). The role of inflection in Scandinavian syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hornstein, N. (1994). An argument for minimalism: The case of antecedent-contained deletion. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 455–80.Find this resource:

(p. 668) Hornstein, N. (1995). Logical form: From GB to minimalism. Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— (1999). Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 69–96.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Pronouns in a minimalist setting. In N. Corver and J. Nunes (eds.), The Copy Theory of movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 351–85.Find this resource:

——— (2009). A theory of syntax: Basic operations and UG. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— and C. Boeckx (2009). Approaching universals from below: I-universals in light of a minimalist program for linguistic theory. In M. H. Christiansen, C. Collins, and S. Edelman (eds.), Language universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 79–98.Find this resource:

——— J. Nunes, and K. K. Grohmann (2005). Understanding minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— and P. Pietroski (2009). Basic operations. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 8: 113–39.Find this resource:

——— S. Rosen, and J. Uriagereka (2002). Integrals. In Uriagereka (2002: 179–91).Find this resource:

——— and J. Uriagereka (2002). Reprojections. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 106–32).Find this resource:

Horty, J. (2007). Frege on definitions: A case study of semantic content. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Horvath, J., and T. Siloni (2002). Against the little-v hypothesis. Rivista di grammatica generativa 27: 107–22.Find this resource:

Huang, C.-T. J. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15: 531–74.Find this resource:

——— (1995). Logical form. In G. Webelhuth (ed.), Government and Binding Theory and the minimalist program. Oxford: Blackwell, 125–76.Find this resource:

Hulk, A., and L. Cornips (2000). Reflexives in middles and the syntax–semantics interface. In H. Bennis and M. Everaert (eds.), Interface strategies. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 207–22.Find this resource:

Hurford, J. (2007). The origins of meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hyams, N. (1986). Language acquisition and the theory of parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel.Find this resource:

——— (1991). A reanalysis of null subjects in child language. In J. Weissenborn, H. Goodluck, and T. Roeper (eds.), Theoretical issues in language acquisition: Continuity and change in development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 249–67.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Missing subjects in early child language. In J. de Villiers and T. Roeper (eds.), Handbook of generative approaches to language acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

——— and K. Wexler (1993). On the grammatical basis of null subjects in child language. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 421–59.Find this resource:

Inkelas, S., and D. Zec (1995). Syntax-phonology interface. In J. A. Goldsmith (ed.), The handbook of phonological theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 535–49.Find this resource:

Ishihara, S. (2001). Stress, focus, and scrambling in Japanese. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 39: 142–75.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Major phrase, focus intonation, multiple spell-out (MaP, FI, MSO). Linguistic Review 24: 137–67.Find this resource:

Ishii, T. (1997). An asymmetry in the composition of phrase structure and its consequences. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Irvine.Find this resource:

——— (1999). Cyclic spell-out and the that-t effects. In S. Bird, A. Carnie, J. D. Hargen, and P. Norquest (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 220–31.Find this resource:

(p. 669) Isobe, M., and K. Sugisaki (2002). The acquisition of pied-piping in French and its theoretical implications. Paper presented at Going Romance 2002: Workshop on Acquisition, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 28–9 November.Find this resource:

I, J., and A. Mester (2003). Lexical and postlexical phonology in Optimality Theory: Evidence from Japanese. In C. Féry and R. van de Vijver (eds.), The syllable in Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 271–303.Find this resource:

Iwakura, K. (1978). On root transformations and the structure-preserving hypothesis. Linguistic Analysis 4: 321–64.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, R. (1969). Some rules of semantic interpretation for English. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1977). X-bar syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and S. Pinker (2005). The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language (reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky). Cognition 95: 211–25.Find this resource:

Jacobson, P. (1999). Variable free semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 22: 117–84.Find this resource:

Jakobson, R. (1984[1936]). Beitrag zur allgemeinen Kasuslehre: Gesamtbedeutung der russischen Kasus. Translated as ‘General meanings of the Russian cases’, in Russian and Slavic grammar: Studies 1931–1981. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 59–104.Find this resource:

——— C. G. M. Fant, and M. Halle (1951). Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jarvis, E. D. (2006). Evolution of structures for song-learning in birds: A synopsis. Acta Zoologica Sinica 52 (Supplement): 85–9.Find this resource:

Jaspers, D. (1998). Categories and recursion. Interface 12: 81–112.Find this resource:

Jayaseelan, K. A. (1997). Anaphors as pronouns. Studia Linguistica 51: 186–234.Find this resource:

Jelinek, E., and A. Carnie (2003). Argument hierarchies and the mapping principle. In A. Carnie, H. Harley, and M. Willie (eds.), Formal approaches to function. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 265–96.Find this resource:

Jelinek, F. (1998). Statistical models of speech recognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jeong, Y. (2006). Multiple questions in Basque. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 98–142.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Applicatives: Structure and interpretation from a minimalist perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Jespersen, O. (1961). A modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 3. London: Allen & Unwin.Find this resource:

——— (1992[1924]). The philosophy of grammar. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Find this resource:

Jo, J.-M. (2004). Grammatical effects of topic and focus information. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Find this resource:

Johannessen, J. B. (1998). Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Johnson, K. (2000a). Few dogs eat Whiskas or cats Alpo. In K. Kusumoto and E. Villalta (eds.), Issues in semantics and its interface. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Find this resource:

——— (2000b). How far will quantifiers go? In R. Martin, D. Michaels and J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 187–210.Find this resource:

——— (2001). What VP-ellipsis can do, what it can't, but not why. In M. Baltin and C. Collins (eds), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 439–80.Find this resource:

(p. 670) Johnson, K. (2007). LCA + alignment = right node raising. Paper presented at Workshop on Coordination, Subordination and Ellipsis, University of Tübingen.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Gapping is not (VP) ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 289–328.Find this resource:

——— and S. Tomioka (1997). Lowering and mid-size Clauses. In G. Katz, S.-S. Kim and H. Winhart (eds.), Reconstruction: Proceedings of the 1997 Tübingen Workshop. Universität Stuttgart and Universität Tübingen, 185–206.Find this resource:

Johnson, M (1988). Attribute value logic and the theory of grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Joshi, A. (1985). How much context-sensitivity is necessary for characterizing structural descriptions? In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen, and A. Zwicky (eds.), Natural language processing: Theoretical, computational and psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press, 206–50.Find this resource:

Jung, Y.-J. (2002). Scrambling, edge effects, and A/A_-distinction. Linguistics Association of Korea Journal 10: 41–64.Find this resource:

——— and S. Miyagawa (2004). Decomposing ditransitive verbs. Proceedings of SICGG, 101–20.Find this resource:

Kahnemuyipour, A. (2004). The syntax of sentential stress. Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto.Find this resource:

Kaisse, E. (1985). Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Find this resource:

——— and S. Hargus (eds.) (1993). Lexical phonology and morphology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Kamali, B., and B. Samuels (2008a). All non-final stress suffixes in Turkish are not created equal. Paper presented at the 2nd Mediterranean Syntax Meeting, Istanbul.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2008b). The syntax of Turkish pre-stressing suffixes. Paper presented at the 3rd Conference on Tone and Intonation in Europe, LisbonFind this resource:

Kamp, H. (1975). Two theories about adjectives. In E. Keenan (ed.), Formal semantics of natural languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 123–55.Find this resource:

Kandybowicz, J. (2007a). Fusion and PF architecture. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium (University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 13.1), 85–98.Find this resource:

——— (2007b). On fusion and multiple copy spell-out: The case of verbal repetition. In N. Corver and J. Nunes (eds.), The Copy Theory of movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 119–50.Find this resource:

——— (2008). The grammar of repetition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Kaplan, R. (1995[1987]). Three seductions of computational psycholinguistics. In M. Dalrymple, R. Kaplan, J. Maxwell, and A. Zaenen (eds.), Formal issues in lexical-functional grammar. Stanford: CSLI.Find this resource:

Karttunen, L. (1977). Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1: 3–44.Find this resource:

Kasai, H. (2008). A multiple dominance approach to parasitic gaps. Presentation at Ways of Structure Building conference, University of the Basque Country, November.Find this resource:

Kato, K. (2009). Fermat-no Saisyuuteiri, Sato-Tate Yosoo Kaiketu-eno Miti [Fermat's last theorem and the paths towards the proof of the Sato-Tate Conjecture]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.Find this resource:

Katz, J. (1994). Names without bearers. Philosophical Review 103: 1–39.Find this resource:

——— and J. Fodor (1963). The structure of a semantic theory. Language 39: 170–210.Find this resource:

(p. 671) Katz, J., and P. Postal (1964). An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Kaufmann, I., and D. Wunderlich (1998). Cross-linguistic patterns of resultatives. MS, Heinrich Heine Universität, Düsseldorf.Find this resource:

Kay, M. (1979). Functional Grammar. In C. Charello (ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: University of California, 142–58.Find this resource:

Kayne, R. (1975). French syntax: The transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1981a). On certain differences between French and English. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 349–71.Find this resource:

——— (1981b). Unambiguous paths. In R. May and J. Koster (eds.), Levels of syntactic representation. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 143–85. Reprinted in Kayne (1984: 129–63).Find this resource:

——— (1984). Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1989a). Facets of Romance past participle agreement. In P. Benincà (ed.), Dialect variation and the theory of grammar. Dordrecht: Foris, 85–104.Find this resource:

——— (1989b). Null subjects and clitic climbing. In O. Jaeggli and K. Safir (eds.), The Null Subject Parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 239–61.Find this resource:

——— (1991). Romance clitics, verb movement and PRO. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 647–86.Find this resource:

——— (1992). Word order. GLOW keynote lecture, Lisbon, April 13.Find this resource:

——— (1993). Toward a molecular theory of auxiliary selection. Studia Linguistica 47: 3–31.Find this resource:

——— (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1995). Agreement and verb morphology in three varieties of English. In H. Haider et al. (eds.), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 159–67.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Overt vs. covert movement. Syntax 1: 128–91.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Parameters and universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Pronouns and their antecedents. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 133–66).Find this resource:

——— (2003). Antisymmetry and Japanese. English Linguistics 20: 1–40. Reprinted in Kayne (2005c: ch. 9).Find this resource:

——— (2005a). On the syntax of quantity in English. In Kayne (2005c)Find this resource:

.

Reprinted in J. Bayer, T. Bhattacharya, and M. T. H. Babu (eds.), Linguistic theory and South Asian languages: Essays in honor of K. A. Jayaseelan (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2007), 73–105.Find this resource:

——— (2005b). Some notes on comparative syntax, with special reference to English and French. In Cinque and Kayne (2005: 3–69).Find this resource:

——— (2005c). Movement and silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2005d). On parameters and on principles of pronunciation. In H. Broekhuis et al.Find this resource:

——— (eds.), Organizing grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 289–99.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Some preliminary comparative remarks on French and Italian definite articles. In R. Freidin, C. Otero, and M.-L. Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 291–321.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Antisymmetry and the lexicon. In A.-M. Di Sciullo and C. Boeckx (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— and J.-Y. Pollock (2001). New thoughts on stylistic inversion. In A. Hulk and J.-Y. Pollock (eds.), Subject inversion in Romance and the theory of universal grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 107–62.Find this resource:

Kean, M.-L. (1974). The strict cycle in phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 5: 179–203.Find this resource:

(p. 672) Kennedy, C. (1997). Antecedent contained deletion and the syntax of quantification. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 662–88.Find this resource:

Kidwai, A. (2000). XP-adjunction in universal grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

King, P. J. (1994). An expanded logical formalism for head-driven phrase structure grammar. Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340, University of Tubingen.Find this resource:

Kiparsky, P. (1982). Lexical phonology andmorphology. In I. S. Yang (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hansin, 3–91.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Remarks on denominal verbs. In A. Alsina, J. Bresnan, and P. Sells (eds.), Complex predicates. Palo Alto, CA: CSLI, 473–99.Find this resource:

Kishimoto, H. (1992). LF pied piping: evidence from Sinhala. Gengo Kenkyu 102: 46–87.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Binding of indeterminate pronouns and clause structure in Japanese. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 597–633.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Wh-in-situ and movement in Sinhala questions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23: 1–51.Find this resource:

Kiss, K. E., and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.) (2004). Verb clusters. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Kitahara, H. (1994a). A minimalist analysis of cross-linguistically variant CED phenomena. In M. Gonzalez (ed.), Proceedings of NELS 24. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 241–53.Find this resource:

——— (1994b). Target-α: A unified theory of movement and structure-building. Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University.Find this resource:

——— (1996). Raising quantifiers without quantifier raising. In W. Abraham, S. D. Epstein, H. Thráinsson, and J.-W. Zwart (eds.), Minimalist ideas: Syntactic studies in the minimalist framework. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 189–98.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Elementary operations and optimal derivations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Scrambling, case, and interpretability. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 167–83).Find this resource:

Klein, E., and I. A. Sag (1985). Type-driven translation. Linguistics and Philosophy 8: 163–201.Find this resource:

Klima, E. S. (1964). Negation in English. In J. A. Fodor and J. J. Katz (eds.), The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy of language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 246–323.Find this resource:

Kluck, M., and H. Heringa (2008). Extending the domain of multiple dominance: A new approach to amalgams and appositions. Paper presented at the 3rd Brussels Conference on Generative Linguistics, May 21–3, Brussels.Find this resource:

Kobele, G. M. (2002). Formalizing mirror theory. Grammars 5: 177–221.Find this resource:

——— (2005). A derivational theory of copying in minimalist grammars. ZAS Syntaxkreis presentation. http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/grads/kobele/papers.htmFind this resource:

——— (2006). Generating copies: an investigation into structural identity in language and grammar. Ph.D. thesis, UCLA.Find this resource:

——— C. Retoré, and S. Salvati (2007). An automata-theoretic approach to minimalism. In J. Rogers and S. Kepser (eds.), Model theoretic syntax at 10. ESSLLI07Workshop Proceedings http://cs.earlham.edu/esslli07mts/Find this resource:

Koeneman, O. (2000). The flexible nature of verb movement. Utrecht: LOT.Find this resource:

Koizumi, M. (1995). Phrase structure in minimalist syntax. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Koopman, H. (1984). The syntax of verb-movement: From verb movement rules in the Kru languages to Universal Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1992). On the absence of case chains in Bambara. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10: 555–94.Find this resource:

(p. 673) Koopman, H., and D. Sportiche (1991). The position of subjects. Lingua 85: 211–58.Find this resource:

——— and A. Szabolsci (2000). Verbal complexes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Koornneef, A. (2008). Eye-catching anaphora. Utrecht: LOT.Find this resource:

Koster, J. (1975). Dutch as an SOV language. Linguistic Analysis 1: 111–36.Find this resource:

——— (1978). Locality principles in syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1985). Reflexives in Dutch. In J. Gueron, H. G. Obenauer, and J.-Y. Pollock (eds.), Grammatical representation. Dordrecht: Foris, 141–67.Find this resource:

Koulouris, A., N. Koziris, T. Andronikos, G. K. Papakonstantinou, and P. Tsanakas (1998). A parallel parsing VLSI architecture for arbitrary context free grammars. International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems, ICPADS98, 783–90.Find this resource:

Kracht, M. (1995). Syntactic codes and grammar refinement. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 4: 41–60.Find this resource:

Krapova, I., and G. Cinque (2004). On the order of wh-phrases in Bulgarian multiple whfronting. MS, University of Venice.Find this resource:

Kratzer, A. (1993). On external arguments. In E. Benedicto and J. Runner (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 17. Amherst: GSLA, University of Massachusetts, 103–30.Find this resource:

——— (1996). Severing the external argument from the verb. In J. Rooryck and L. Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 109–37.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Making a pronoun: Fake indexicals as windows into the properties of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 187–237.Find this resource:

Krause, J., C. Lalueza-Fox, L. Orlando, W. Enard, R. E. Green, H. Burbano, J.-J. Hublin, C. Hänni, J. Fortea, M. de la Rasilla, J. Bertranpetit, A. Rosas, and S. Pääbo (2007). The derived FOXP2 variant of modern humans was shared with Neanderthals. Current Biology 17.21: 1908–12.Find this resource:

Krifka, M. (2001). Quantifying into question acts. Natural Language Semantics 9: 1–40.Find this resource:

Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Kroch, A., and B. Santorini (2007). The syntax of natural language: An online introduction using the Trees program. www.ling.upenn.edu/∼beatrice/syntax-textbookFind this resource:

Kuno, S. (1973). The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and K. Takami (1997). Remarks on negative islands. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 553–76.Find this resource:

Kuratowski, K. (1921). Sur la notion de lʼordre dans la théorie des ensembles. Fundamenta mathematicae 2: 161–171.Find this resource:

Kuroda, S.-Y. (1971). Remarks on the notion of subject with reference to words like also, even, or only, illustrating certain manners in which formal systems are employed as duxiliary Devices in linguistic descriptions, part 2. Annual Bulletin 4: 127–52.Find this resource:

Logopedics and Phoniatrics Research Institute, University of Tokyo.

Reprinted in Papers in Japanese Linguistics 11: 157–202.Find this resource:

——— (1976). A topological study of phrase-structure languages. Information and Control 30: 307–79.Find this resource:

——— (1988). Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Linguisticae Investigationes 12: 1–47.Find this resource:

Reprinted in S.-Y. Kuroda (ed.), Japanese syntax and semantics (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 1992), 315–57.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Suugaku to seiseibunpoo: Setumeiteki datoosei-no kanatani sosite gengo-no suugakuteki zituzairon [Mathematics and generative grammar: Beyond explanatory adequacy and mathematical realism of language] (with an extended English summary). In Sophia Linguistica 56: 1–36 (Sophia University, Tokyo).Find this resource:

Labov, W. (1994). Principles of language change: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

(p. 674) Laenzlinger, C. (1998). Comparative studies in word order variations: Adverbs, pronouns and clause structure in Romance and Germanic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Lai, C. S., S. E. Fisher, J. A. Hurst, F. Vargha-Khandem, and A. P. Monaco (2001). A forkhead-domain gene is mutated in a severe speech and language disorder. Nature 413: 519–23.Find this resource:

——— D. Gerrelli, A. P. Monaco, S. E. Fisher, and A. J. Copp (2003). FOXP2 expression during brain development coincides with adult sites of pathology in a severe speech and language disorder. Brain 126: 2455–62.Find this resource:

Lakoff, G. (1971). On generative semantics. In D. D. Steinberg and L. A. Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 232–96.Find this resource:

——— (1974). Syntactic amalgams. In M. Galy, R. Fox, and A. Bruck (eds.), Papers from the tenth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 321–44.Find this resource:

——— and H. Ross (1976). Is deep structure necessary? In McCawley (1976: 159–64).Find this resource:

Landau, I. (1999). Elements of control. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Elements of control: Structure and meaning in infinitival constructions. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Movement out of control. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 471–98.Find this resource:

——— (2004). The scale of finiteness and the calculus of control. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22: 811–77.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Chain resolution in Hebrew V(P)-fronting. Syntax 9: 32–66.Find this resource:

Langendoen, D. T. (2003). Merge. In A. Carnie, H. Harley, and M. Willie (eds.), Formal approaches to function in grammar: In honor of Eloise Jelinek. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 307–18.Find this resource:

Lappin, S., R. D. Levine, and D. E. Johnson (2000). The structure of unscientific revolutions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 665–71.Find this resource:

Larson, B. (2007). In- or ex-situ: A diagnosis of right node raising. Undergraduate honors thesis, University of Washington.Find this resource:

Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 335–91.Find this resource:

——— (1990). Double objects revisited: reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry 21: 589–632.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). On shell structure. London: Routledge.Find this resource:

——— and G. Segal (1995). Knowledge of meaning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Lasnik, H. (1972). Analyses of negation in English. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1995a). Case and expletives revisited: On greed and other human failings. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 615–33.Find this resource:

——— (1995b). A note on pseudogapping. In MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27: Papers in minimalist syntax, 143–63.Find this resource:

Reprinted with minor corrections in Minimalist analysis (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999), 151–74.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Syntactic structures revisited. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Conceptions of the cycle. In L. Cheng and N. Corver, Wh-movement: Moving on. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 197–216.Find this resource:

——— and M. Saito (1991). On the subject of infinitives. CLS 27.1: 324–43.Find this resource:

Reprinted in Lasnik, H. Minimalist analysis (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999), 7–24.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1992). Move α: conditions on its application and output. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and J. Uriagereka (1988). A course in GB syntax: Lectures on Binding and empty categories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 675) Lasnik, H., J. Uriagereka and C. Boeckx (2005). A course in minimalist syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Law, P. (1991). Effects of head movement on theories of subjacency and proper government. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Lebeaux, D. (1988). Language acquisition and the form of the grammar. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

——— (1991). Relative clauses, licensing, and the nature of the derivation. In S. Rothstein (ed.), Perspectives on phrase structure: Heads and licensing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 209–39.Find this resource:

——— (1994). Where does the binding theory apply? MS, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Where does the binding theory apply? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Lecarme, J. (1996). Tense in the nominal system: The Somali DP. In J. Lecarme, J. Lowenstamm, and U. Shlonsky (eds.), Studies in Afroasiatic grammar. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics, 159–78.Find this resource:

Lechner, W. (2005). Interpretive effects of head-movement. MS, University of Tübingen (lingBuzz/000178).Find this resource:

Lee, F. (2003). Anaphoric R-expressions as bound variables. Syntax 6: 84–114.Find this resource:

Lee, J.-E. (2004). Ditransitive structures and (anti-)locality. Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Escape hatch effects and anti-locality in passivization of ditransitive verb phrases. Studies in Generative Grammar 15: 53–75.Find this resource:

Lees, R., and E. Klima (1963). Rules for English pronominalization. Language 39: 17–28.Find this resource:

Legate, J. (2003). Some interface properties of the phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 506–16.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Morphological and abstract case. Linguistic Inquiry 39: 55–101.Find this resource:

——— and C. Yang (2007). Morphosyntactic learning and the development of tense. Language Acquisition 14: 315–44.Find this resource:

Leiss, E. (2009). Sprachphilosophie. Eine Einführung in ihre Axiomatik. Berlin: de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Lema, J., and M.-L. Rivero (1990). Long head-movement: ECP vs. HMC. Proceedings of NELS 20. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts, 333–47.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1991). Types of verbal movement in Old Spanish: Modals, futures and perfects. Probus 3: 237–78.Find this resource:

Levin, B., and M. Rappaport Hovav (1995). Unaccusativity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1998). Building verb meanings. In M. Butt and W. Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 97–134.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2001). An event structure account of English resultatives. Language 77: 766–97.Find this resource:

Levin, J. (1985). A metrical theory of syllabicity. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Levine, R. D., and T. E. Hukari (2006). The unity of unbounded dependency constructions. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Lewis, D. K. (2002). Convention: A philosophical study. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Lewontin, R. C. (1998). The evolution of cognition: Questions we will never answer. In D. Scarborough and S. Sternberg (eds.), An invitation to cognitive science, vol. 4: Methods, models and conceptual issues. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 107–32.Find this resource:

Li, G., J. Wang, S. J. Rossiter, G. Jones, and S. Zhang (2007). Accelerated FOXP2 evolution in echolocating bats. PloS ONE 2.9, e900. PLOS Biology 9: e9001–10.Find this resource:

Liberman, M. (1974). On conditioning the rule of subject-aux inversion. Proceedings of NELS 5: 77–91.Find this resource:

Lidz, J. (1996). Dimensions of reflexivity. Ph.D. thesis, University of Delaware.Find this resource:

——— (2001). The argument structure of verbal reflexives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 311–53.Find this resource:

(p. 676) Lidz, J., and W. J. Idsardi (1998). Chains and phono-logical form. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 5.1: 109–25.Find this resource:

——— and J. Musolino (2002). Children's command of quantification. Cognition 84: 113–54.Find this resource:

Liégeois, F., T. Badelweg, A. Connelly, D. G. Gadian, M. Mishkin, and F. Vargha-Khadem (2003). Language fMRI abnormalities associated with FOXP2 gene mutation. Nature Neuroscience 6: 1230–37.Find this resource:

Lightfoot, D. (1991). How to set parameters: Arguments from language change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1999). The development of language: Acquisition, change and evolution. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Lin, V. (2000). Determiner sharing. In R. Billerey and B. D. Lillehaugen (eds.), Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 274–87.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Coordination and sharing at the interfaces. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Linebarger, M. (1981). The grammar of negative polarity. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretic approach. In R. Bäuerle et al. (eds.), Meaning, use, and interpretation of language. Berlin: de Gruyter, 302–23.Find this resource:

Lipták, A., and L. Vicente (2009). Pronominal doubling under predicate topicalization. Lingua 119: 650–86.Find this resource:

Lobeck, A. (1990). Functional heads as proper governors. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 20: 348–62. GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

——— (1995). Ellipsis: Functional heads, licensing, and identification. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Locke, J. (1997). A theory of neurolinguistc development. Brain and Language 58: 265–326.Find this resource:

Lohndal, T. (2010). Medial-wh phenomena, parallel movement, and parameters. Linguistic Analysis 34.Find this resource:

Longobardi, G. (1987). Extraction from NP and the proper notion of head government. In A. Giorgi and G. Longobardi (eds.), The syntax of noun phrases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57–112.Find this resource:

——— (1994). Reference and proper names. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609–65.Find this resource:

Ludlow, P. (2002). Natural logic and LF. In Preyer and Peter (2002: 132–68).Find this resource:

Lycan, W. (2008). An introduction to the philosophy of language. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.Find this resource:

Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Mahajan, A. (1990). The A/A-bar distinction and movement theory. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (ed.) (2003). Syntax at sunset 3: Head movement and syntactic theory. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 10.Find this resource:

Mailhot, F., and C. Reiss (2007). Computing long-distance dependencies in vowel harmony. Biolinguistics 1: 28–48.Find this resource:

Maneth, S. (2004). Models of tree translation. Ph.D. thesis, Universiteit Leiden.Find this resource:

Manzini, M. R. (1994). Locality, minimalism, and parasitic gaps. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 481–508.Find this resource:

——— and L. Savoia (2008). Uninterpretable features are incompatible in morphology with other minimalist postulates. In R. Freidin, C. Otero, and M.-L. Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 43–72.Find this resource:

(p. 677) Marantz, A. (1984). On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1988). Clitics, morphological merger and the mapping to phonological structure. In M. Hammond and M. Noonan (eds.), Theoretical morphology. New York: Academic Press, 253–70.Find this resource:

——— (1991). Case and licensing. In G. Westphal, B. Ao, and H.-R. Chae (eds.), Proceedings of the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, Columbus: Ohio State University, Department of Linguistics, 234–53.Find this resource:

——— (1997). No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In A. Dimitriadis and L. Siegel (eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium, University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 201–25.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Words. WCCFL XX handout, USC, February 2001.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Phases and words. In S. H. Choe (ed.), Phases in the theory of grammar. Seoul: Dong In, 191–220.Find this resource:

Marler, P., and R. Tenaza (1977). Signaling behavior of apes with special reference to vocalization. In T. A. Sebeok (ed.), How animals communicate. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 965–1032.Find this resource:

Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.Find this resource:

Marsh, W., and B. H. Partee (1984). How non-context free is variable binding? In M. Cobler, S. MacKaye, and M. Wescoat (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford, CA: Stanford Linguistics Association, 179–90.Find this resource:

Martin, R. (2001). Null Case and the distribution of PRO. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 141–66.Find this resource:

——— and J. Uriagereka (2000). Introduction: Some possible foundations for the Minimalist Program. In R. Martin et al. (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–29.Find this resource:

Martins, A. M. (2007). Double realization of verbal copies in European Portuguese emphatic affirmation. In N. Corver and J. Nunes (eds.), The Copy Theory of Movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 77–118.Find this resource:

Marušiˇc, F. L. (2005). On non-simultaneous phases. Ph.D. thesis, Stony Brook University, New York.Find this resource:

Marvin, T. (2002). Topics in the stress and syntax of words. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Mascaró, J. (1976). Catalan phonology and the phonological cycle. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Massam, D. (2000). VSO and VOS: Aspects of Niuean word order. In A. Carnie and E. Guilfoyle (eds.), The syntax of verb-initial languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 97–116.Find this resource:

——— and C. Smallwood (1997). Essential features of predication in Niuean and English. In K. Kusumoto (ed.), Proceedings of NELS 27. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 236–72.Find this resource:

Mateescu, A., and A. Salomaa (1997). Aspects of classical language theory. In G. Rozenberg and A. Salomaa (eds.), Handbook of formal languages, vol. 1: Word, language, grammar. New York: Springer, 175–251.Find this resource:

Mateu, J. (2002). Argument structure: Relational construal at the syntax-semantics interface. Ph.D. thesis, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Find this resource:

Matthewson, L. (2005). On the absence of tense on determiners. Lingua 115: 1697–1735.Find this resource:

Matushansky, O. (2006). Head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 69–110.Find this resource:

Maxwell, D. (1984). A typologically based principle of linearization. Language 60: 251–85.Find this resource:

May, R. (1977). The grammar of quantification. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

(p. 678) May, R. (1985). Logical form: Its structure and derivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1988). Ambiguities of quantification and WH: A reply to Williams. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 118–34.Find this resource:

——— (1991). Syntax, semantics and logical form. In A. Kasher (ed.), The Chomskian turn: Generative linguistics, mathematics, philosophy and psychology. Oxford: Blackwell, 334–59.Find this resource:

Mayr, C., and M. Reitbauer (2004). Emphatische Topikalisierung ist Linksdislokation. MS, University of Vienna.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2005). Left-dislocation, agreement, and the notion of anti-locality. Paper presented at the 2nd Left Periphery in Aphasia Meeting (LPIA 2): The Structure of the Left Periphery in Germanic Languages: CP- and IP-Related Elements in Normal and Impaired Speech, University of Vienna, 21–3 August.Find this resource:

McCawley, J. D. (1968). Lexical insertion in a grammar without deep structure. In B. J. Darden, C.-J. N. Bailey, and A. Davidson (eds.), Papers from the Fourth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: University of Chicago, 71–80.Find this resource:

——— (1971). Tense and time reference in English. In C. Fillmore and D. Langendoen (eds), Studies in linguistic semantics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 95–113.Find this resource:

Reprinted in J. McCawley (1973). Grammar and meaning. Tokyo: Taishukan, 257–72.Find this resource:

——— (ed.) (1976). Syntax and semantics 7: Notes from the linguistic underground. New York: Academic Press.Find this resource:

——— (1979[1974]). On identifying the remains of deceased clauses. In J. McCawley, Adverbs, vowels, and other objects of wonder. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 74–85.Find this resource:

——— (1982). Parentheticals and discontinuous constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 91–106.Find this resource:

McCloskey, J. (1979). Transformational syntax and model theoretic semantics: A case study in Modern Irish. Dordrecht: Reidel.Find this resource:

——— (1986). Right node raising and preposition stranding. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 183–6.Find this resource:

——— (1992). Adjunction, selection, and embedded verb second. Santa Cruz, CA: Linguistics Research Center.Find this resource:

——— (1996). The scope of verb-movement in Irish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14: 47–104.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Quantifier float and wh-movement in an Irish English. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 57–84.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of operations. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 184–226).Find this resource:

McDaniel, D. (1986). Conditions on wh-chains. Ph.D. thesis, CUNY.Find this resource:

——— (1989). Partial and multiple wh-movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7: 565–604.Find this resource:

McGinnis, M. (2004). Lethal ambiguity. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 47–95.Find this resource:

McGonigle, B. O., and M. Chalmers (2006). Ordering and executive functioning as a window on the evolution and development of cognitive system. International Journal of Comparative Psychology 19: 241–67.Find this resource:

McMahon, A. (2000). Lexical phonology and the history of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Medeiros, D. (2008). Optimal growth in phrase structure. Biolinguistics 2: 152–95.Find this resource:

Mendívil, J. L. (2009). Origen, evolución y diversidad de las lenguas: Una aproximación biolingüística. Frankfurt: Lang.Find this resource:

(p. 679) Menuzzi, S. (1999). Binding Theory and pronominal anaphora in Brazilian Portuguese. Ph.D. thesis, Leiden University.Find this resource:

Merchant, J. (2001). The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2008). An asymmetry in voice mismatches in VP-ellipsis and pseudogapping. Linguistic Inquiry 39: 169–79.Find this resource:

Michaelis, J. (1998). Derivational minimalism is mildly context-sensitive. Paper presented at the conference Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics (LACL ‘98), Grenoble.Find this resource:

Published in

M. Moortgat (ed.), Logical aspects of computational linguistics (Berlin: Springer, 2001), 179–98.Find this resource:

——— (2001a). On formal properties of minimalist grammars. Ph.D thesis, Universität Potsdam.Find this resource:

——— (2001b). Transforming linear context free rewriting systems into Minimalist grammars. In P. de Groote, G. Morrill, and C. Retoré (eds.), Logical aspects of computational linguistics, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, No. 2099. New York: Springer, 228–444.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Notes on the complexity of complex heads in a minimalist grammar. Paper presented at the 6th International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms (TAG+6), Venice, 20–24 May.Find this resource:

——— (2004). Observations on strict derivational minimalism. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 53: 192–209.Find this resource:

——— U. Mönnich, and F. Morawietz (2001). On minimalist attribute grammars and macro tree transducers. In C. Rohrer, A. Rossdeutscher, and H. Kamp (eds.), Linguistic form and its computation. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 287–326.Find this resource:

Michaels, J. (2007). Syntactically conditioned phonology: Causatives in Malayalam. MS, MIT.Find this resource:

Mithun, M. (1984). The evolution of noun incorporation. Language 60: 847–94.Find this resource:

——— (1988). The grammaticization of coordination. In J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson (eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 331–59.Find this resource:

Miyagawa, S. (1997). Against optional scrambling. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 1–25.Find this resource:

——— (2001). EPP, scrambling, and wh-in-situ. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 293–338.Find this resource:

——— (2003). A-movement scrambling and options without optionality. In S. Karimi (ed.), Word order and scrambling. Oxford: Blackwell, 177–200.Find this resource:

——— (2005a). On the EPP. In M. McGinnis and N. Richards (eds.), Perspectives on phases: Working Papers in Linguistics 49: 201–36. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Find this resource:

——— (2005b). EPP and semantically vacuous scrambling. In J. Sabel and M. Saito (eds.), The free word order phenomenon: Its syntactic sources and diversity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 181–220.Find this resource:

——— (2006a). On the undoing property of scrambling: a response to Bošković. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 607–24.Find this resource:

——— (2006b). Moving to the edge. Proceedings of the 2006 KALS-KASELL International Conference on English and Linguistics. Busan, Korea: Pusan National University, 3–18.Find this resource:

——— (2010). Why agree? Why move? Unifying agreement-based and discourse configurational languages. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and M. Saito (eds.) (2008). The handbook of Japanese linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 680) Mobbs, I. (2008). Functionalism, the design of the language faculty, and (disharmonic) typology. MS, Cambridge University.Find this resource:

Mohanan, K. P. (1982). Lexical phonology. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Moltmann, F. (1992). Coordination and comparatives. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— and A. Szabolcsi (1994). Scope interaction with pair-list quantifiers. In M. González (ed.), Proceedings of NELS 24. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts, 381–95.Find this resource:

Montague, R. (1974). Formal philosophy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Find this resource:

Moro, A. (2000). Dynamic antisymmetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Morris, M. (2006). Introduction to the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Mortensen, D. (2003). Two kinds of variable elements in Hmong Anaphora. MS, UC Berkeley.Find this resource:

Moschovakis, Y. N. (2001). What is an algorithm? In B. Engquist and W. Schmid (eds.), Mathematics unlimited: 2001 and beyond. New York: Springer, 919–36.Find this resource:

Muadz, H. (1991). Coordinate structures: A planar representation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Arizona.Find this resource:

Müller, G. (1996). Incomplete category fronting. SfS report 01–96, Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Tübingen.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Partial wh-movement and optimality theory. Linguistic Review 14: 249–306.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Incomplete category fronting. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Shape conservation and remnant movement. Presented at the 30th Conference of the North East Linguistic Society, NELS 30.Find this resource:

——— (2004a). Verb-second as vP-first. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 7: 139–274.Find this resource:

——— (2004b). Phrase impenetrability and wh-intervention. In A. Stepanov, G. Fanselow, and R. Vogel (eds.), Minimality effects in syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 289–325.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Towards a relativized concept of cyclic linearization. In U. Sauerland and H.-M. Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 61–114.Find this resource:

——— and W. Sternefeld (1993). Improper movement and unambiguous binding. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 461–507.Find this resource:

Munaro, N. (1999). Sintagmi interrogativi nei dialetti italiani settentrionali. Padua: Unipress.Find this resource:

Munn, A. (1993). Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

Murasugi, K., and M. Saito (1995). Adjunction and cyclicity. WCCFL 13: 302–17.Find this resource:

Muysken, P. (1982). Parameterizing the notion head. Journal of Linguistic Research 2: 57–75.Find this resource:

Narita, H. (2009a). Full interpretation of optimal labeling. Biolinguistics 3: 213–54.Find this resource:

——— (2009b). Multiple transfer in service of recursive Merge. Paper presented at the 32nd GLOW Colloquium.Find this resource:

Abstract published in

GLOW Newsletter 62: 89–91.Find this resource:

——— (2010). Phase cycles in service of projection-free syntax. MS, Harvard University.Find this resource:

——— and B. Samuels (2009). The H-alpha schema and phonological ph(r)asing. Paper presented at the ConSOLE XVIII workshop on the interfaces, Barcelona.Find this resource:

Nederhof, M.-J. and G. Satta (2003). Probabilistic parsing strategies. In Proceedings of the 3rd AMAST Workshop on Algebraic Methods in Language Processing (AMiLP 2003) Verona, 305–14.Find this resource:

Neeleman, A. (1994). Complex predicates. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht.Find this resource:

(p. 681) Neeleman, A., and T. Reinhart (1998). Scrambling and the PF interface. In M. Butt and W. Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 309–53.Find this resource:

——— and H. van de Koot (2006). Syntactic haplology. In M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk with R. Goedemans and B. Hollebrandse (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 4. Oxford: Blackwell, 695–710.Find this resource:

Nemoto, N. (1993). Chains and case positions: A study from scrambling in Japanese. Ph.D. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Find this resource:

Nespor, M., and I. Vogel (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

Nevins, A. (2004). Conditions on (dis)harmony. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Derivations without the activity condition. In M. McGinnis and N. Richards (eds.), Perpectives on phases, vol. 49 of MIT Working Papers in Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 283–306.Find this resource:

Newell, H. (2008). Aspects of the morphology and phonology of phases. Ph.D. thesis, McGill University.Find this resource:

Newman, S. (1946). On the stress system in English. Word 2: 171–87.Find this resource:

Newmeyer, F. (2004). Against a parameter-setting approach to language variation. Language Variation Yearbook 4, 181–234.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Possible and probable languages: A generative perspective on linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Nilsen, Ø. (2003). Eliminating positions: Syntax and semantics of sentential modification. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht.Find this resource:

Nissenbaum, J. (2000). Investigations of covert phrase movement. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Nottebohm, F., and M. E. Nottebohm (1978). Relationship between song repertoire and age in the canary Serinus canaria. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 46: 298–305.Find this resource:

——— and L. Crane (1986). Developmental and seasonal changes in canary song and their relation to changes in the anatomy of song control nuclei. Behavioural and Neural Biology 46: 457–86.Find this resource:

Nowak, M. A., N. L. Komarova, and P. Niyogi (2001). Evolution of Universal Grammar. Science 291: 114–18.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Computational and evolutionary aspects of language. Nature 417: 611–17.Find this resource:

Nunberg, G. (1979). The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions: Polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 3: 143–84.Find this resource:

——— I. Sag, and T. Wasow (1994). Idioms. Language 70: 491–538.Find this resource:

Nunes, J. (1995). The Copy Theory of Movement and linearization of chains in the Minimalist Program. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Bare X-theory and structures formed by movement. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 160–68.Find this resource:

——— (1999). Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links. In S. D. Epstein and N. Hornstein (eds.), Working Minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 217–49.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Sideward movement Linguistic Inquiry 32: 303–44.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Head movement, remnant movement, and phonetic realization of chains. In Syntax at sunset 3: Head movement and syntactic theory. UCLA/Potsdam Working Papers in Linguistics, 161–77.Find this resource:

——— (2004). Linearization of chains and sideward movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 682) Nunes, J., and R. Quadros (2006). Duplication of wh-elements in Brazilian Sign Language. In L. Batenab and C. Ussery (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-fifth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol. 2. Amherst: GLSA, University of Masschusetts, 463–77.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2008). Phonetically realized traces in American Sign Language and Brazilian language. In J. Quer (ed.), Signs of the time: Selected papers from TISLR 2004. Seedorf: Signum, 177–90.Find this resource:

Obata, M., and S. D. Epstein (2008). Deducing improper movement from phase based C-to-T phi transfer: Feature-splitting Internal Merge. In N. Abner and J. Bishop (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Find this resource:

Obenauer, H. (1983). On the identification of empty categories. Linguistic Review 4: 153–202.Find this resource:

——— (1994). Aspects de la syntaxe A-barre. Thèse de doctorat dʼétat, Université de Paris VIII.Find this resource:

Odden, D. (1990). Syntax, lexical rules, and postlexical rules in Kimatuumbi. In S. Inkelas and D. Zec (eds.), The phonology–syntax connection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 259–77.Find this resource:

Oiry, M. (2008). Lʼacquisition des questions à longue-distance en Français. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Nantes.Find this resource:

Oka, T. (1989). On the spec of IP. MS, MIT.Find this resource:

Oppenheimer, S. (2003). Out of Eden: The peopling of the world. London: Robinson.Find this resource:

Otani, K., and J. Whitman (1991). V-raising and VP ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 345–58.Find this resource:

Otsuka, Y. (2005). Scrambling and information focus: VSO/VOS alternation in Tongan. In J. Sabel and M. Saito (eds.), The free word order phenomenon: Its syntactic sources and diversity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 243–80.Find this resource:

Ott, D. (2008). On noun ph(r)ases. MS, Harvard University.Find this resource:

——— (2009). The evolution of I-language: Lexicalization as the key evolutionary novelty. Biolinguistics 3: 255–69.Find this resource:

Ouhalla, J. (1988). The syntax of headmovement. Ph.D. thesis, University College London.Find this resource:

Pak, M. (2008). The postsyntactic derivation and its phonological reflexes. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Find this resource:

Panagiotidis, E. P., and K. K. Grohmann (2009). Mixed projections: Categorial switches and prolific domains. Linguistic Analysis 35: 141–61.Find this resource:

Paperno, D. (2008). Multiple extraction and minimalist grammars. MS, University of California, Los Angeles.Find this resource:

Parberry, I. (1996). Circuit complexity and feedforward neural networks. In P. Smolensky, M. C. Mozer, and D. Rumelhart (eds.), Mathematical perspectives on neural networks. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 85–111.Find this resource:

Parsons, T. (1970). Some problems concerning the logic of grammaticalmodifiers. Synthese 21: 320–34.Find this resource:

——— (1990). Events in the semantics of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Partee, B. (2006). Do we need two basic types? In H.-M. Gärtner et al. (eds.), 40–60 puzzles for Manfred Krifka. Available at: http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/40–60-puzzles-for-krifkaFind this resource:

——— and M. Rooth (1983). Generalized conjunction and type ambiguity. In R. Bäuerle et al. (eds.), Meaning, use, and interpretation of language. Berlin: de Gruyter, 361–83.Find this resource:

——— A. ter Meulen, and R. E. Wall (1990). Mathematical methods in linguistics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Find this resource:

Peacocke, C. (1986a). Thoughts: An essay on content. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

(p. 683) Peacocke, C. (1986b). Explanation in computational psychology: Language, perception and level 1.5. Mind and Language 1: 101–23.Find this resource:

Perez-Leroux, A., and X. Li (2001). Selectivity in the acquisition of complex NP islands. In E. Klein and G. Martohardjono (eds.), The development of second language grammars. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 147–68.Find this resource:

Perruchet, P., and A. Rey (2005). Does the mastery of center-embedded linguistic structures distinguish humans from non-human primates? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 12: 307–13.Find this resource:

Pesetsky, D. (1979). Russian morphology and lexical theory. MS, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1982). Paths and categories. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1987). Wh-in situ: Movement and unselective binding. In A. G. B. ter Meulen and E. Reuland (eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 98–129.Find this resource:

——— (1995). Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1997). Optimality Theory and syntax: Movement and pronunciation. In D. Archangeli and D. T. Langendoen (eds.), Optimality Theory: An overview. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 134–70.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation. In P. Barbosa, D. Fox, M. McGinnis, and D. Pesetsky (eds.), Is the best good enough? Optimality and competition in syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 337–83.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and E. Torrego (2001). T to C movement: causes and consequences. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 355–426.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2004). Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In J. Guéron and J. Lecarme (eds.), The syntax of time. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 495–538.Find this resource:

——— ——— (2007). The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In S. Karimi, V. Samiian, and W. K. Wilkins (eds.), Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 262–94.Find this resource:

Peters, P. S., and R. W. Ritchie (1973). On the generative power of transformational grammar. Information Sciences 6: 49–83.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1981). Phrase-linking grammar. MS, University of Texas at Austin.Find this resource:

Petronio, K. (1993). Clause structure in American Sign Language. Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.Find this resource:

——— and D. Lillo-Martin (1997). Wh-movement and the position of Spec-CP: Evidence from American Sign Language. Language 73: 18–57.Find this resource:

Philip, W. (1995). Event quantification in the acquisition of universal quantification. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Find this resource:

——— (2004). Two theories of exhaustive pairing. MS, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics.Find this resource:

Phillips, C. (1996). Order and structure. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Linear order and constituency. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 37–90.Find this resource:

Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (1989). Evolution, selection, and cognition: From learning to parameter setting in biology and in the study of language. Cognition 31: 1–44.Find this resource:

——— and J. Uriagereka (2005). The evolution of the narrow faculty of language: The skeptical view and a reasonable conjecture. Lingue e linguaggio 4: 27–79.Find this resource:

——— ——— (forthcoming). A geneticist's dream, a linguist's nightmare: The case of FOXP2. In A.-M. Di Sciullo and C. Boeckx (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 684) Piattelli-Palmarini, M., P. Salaburu, and J. Uriagereka (eds.) (2009). Of minds and language: A dialogue with Noam Chomsky in the Basque Country. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Pica, P. and W. Snyder (1995). Weak crossover, scope, and agreement in a Minimalist framework. In R. Aranovich et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 334–49.Find this resource:

Picallo, C. (1998). On the EPP and null expletive subjects. Probus 10: 219–41.Find this resource:

Pierce, A. (1992). Language acquisition and syntactic theory. Boston, MA: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Pietroski, P. (2005a). Events and semantic architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2005b). Meaning before truth. In G. Preyer and G. Peter (eds.), Contextualism in philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 253–300.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Interpreting concatenation and concatenates. Philosophical Issues 16: 22–45.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Minimalist meaning, internalist interpretation. Biolinguistics 4: 317–41.Find this resource:

——— (2010). Concepts, meanings, and truth: First nature, second nature, and hard work. Mind and Language 25: 247–78.Find this resource:

——— J. Lidz, T. Hunter, and J. Halberda (2009). The meaning of most: Semantics, numerosity, and psychology. Mind and Language 24: 554–85.Find this resource:

Piggott, G., and H. Newell (2006). Syllabification, stress and derivation by phase in Ojibwa. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 20.Find this resource:

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1989). Language learnability and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1994). The language instinct. New York: Morrow.Find this resource:

——— (2007). The stuff of thought. New York: Viking.Find this resource:

——— and P. Bloom (1990). Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Science 13: 707–27.Find this resource:

——— and R. Jackendoff (2005). The faculty of language: What's special about it? Cognition 95: 201–36.Find this resource:

Plaster, K., and M. Polinsky (2007). Women are not dangerous things: Gender and categorization. Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics 12. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Find this resource:

Platzack, C. (1983). Germanic word order and the COMP/INFL parameter. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 2.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Multiple interfaces. In U. Nikanne and E. van der Zee (eds.), Cognitive interfaces: Constraints on linking cognitive information. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21–53.Find this resource:

Poeppel, D., and D. Embick (2005). The relation between linguistics and neuroscience. In A. Cutler (ed.), Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 103–118.Find this resource:

——— and K. Wexler (1993). The Full Competence Hypothesis. Language 69: 1–33.Find this resource:

Poletto, C., and J.-Y. Pollock (2004). On the left periphery of some Romance whquestions. In Rizzi (2004c: 251–96).Find this resource:

Polinsky, M., and E. Potsdam (2002). Backward control. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 245–82.Find this resource:

Pollard, C., and I. A. Sag (1987). Information-based syntax and semantics, vol. 1: Fundamentals. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1992). Anaphors in English and the scope of Binding Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 261–303.Find this resource:

(p. 685) Pollard, C., and I. A. Sag (1994). Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI and Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Pollock, J.-Y. (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20.3: 365–424.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Subject clitics and complex inversion. In M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 4. Oxford: Blackwell, 601–59.Find this resource:

Poletto, C., and N. Munaro (2003). Eppur si muove! On comparing French, Portuguese and Bellunese wh-movement. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 1, 147–80.Find this resource:

Post, E. (1943). Formal deductions of the general combinatorial decision problem. American Journal of Mathematics 65.2: 197–215.Find this resource:

Postal, P. (1964). Constituent structure: A study of contemporary models of syntactic description. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.1, pt 3.Find this resource:

——— (1970). On coreferential complement subject deletion. Linguistic Inquiry 1: 439–500.Find this resource:

——— (1972). The best theory. In P. S. Peters (ed.), Goals of linguistic theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall: 131–70.Find this resource:

——— (1974). On raising: One rule of English grammar and its theoretical implications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Three investigations of extraction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Potts, C., and T. Roeper (2006). The narrowing acquisition path: From expressive small clauses to declaratives. In L. Progovac, K. Paesani, E. Casielles, and E. Barton (eds.), The syntax of nonsententials: Multi-disciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 183–201.Find this resource:

Preminger, O. (2008). (Im)perfect domains: Yet another theory of syntactic movement. In C. Chang and H. Haynie (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 26. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 402–10.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Breaking agreements: Distinguishing agreement and clitic-doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 619–66.Find this resource:

Preyer, G., and G. Peter (eds.) (2002). Logical form and language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Progovac, L. (1994). Positive and negative polarity: A binding approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— (1998). Structure for coordination (part I). GLOT International 3.7: 3–6.Find this resource:

Pustejovsky, J. (1991). The syntax of event structure. Cognition 41: 47–81.Find this resource:

Putnam, H. (1975). The meaning of meaning. In K. Gunderson (ed.), Language, mind and knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Find this resource:

Putnam, M. T. (2007). Scrambling and the survive principle. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Pylkkänen, L. (2002). Introducing arguments. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2003). Seeing and visualizing: It's not what you think. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2007). Things and places. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Quine, W. (1948–49). On what there is. Review of Metaphysics 2: 21–38.Find this resource:

Quinn, H. (2009). Downward reanalysis and the rise of stative HAVE got. In P. Crisma and G. Longobardi (eds.), Historical syntax and linguistic theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 212–30.Find this resource:

(p. 686) Rackowski, A., and N. Richards (2005). Phase edge and extraction: A Tagalog case study. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 565–99.Find this resource:

——— and L. Travis (2000). V-initial Languages: X or XP movement and adverbial placement. In A. Carnie and E. Guilfoyle (eds.), The syntax of verb-initial languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 117–42.Find this resource:

Radford, A. (1994). The nature of children's initial clauses. MS, Essex University.Find this resource:

Raimy, E. (2000). The phonology and morphology of reduplication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

——— (2003). Asymmetry and linearization in phonology. In A. M. Di Sciullo (ed.), Asymmetry in grammar, vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 129–46.Find this resource:

Ramchand, G. (2008). Verb meaning and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

——— and P. Svenonius (2002). The lexical syntax and lexical semantics of the verb-particle construction. In L. Mikkelsen and C. Potts (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 21. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 387–400.Find this resource:

Rappaport Hovav, M., and B. Levin (2008). The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics 44: 129–67.Find this resource:

Reinhart, T. (1983). Anaphora and semantic interpretation. London: Croom Helm.Find this resource:

——— (1983). Coreference and bound anaphora: A restatement of the anaphora questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 6: 47–88.Find this resource:

——— (1995/2006). Interface strategies. OTS working papers, Utrecht University. Published 2006 by MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2000). Strategies of anaphora resolution. In H. Bennis, M. Everaert, and E. Reuland (eds.), Interface strategies. Amsterdam: Royal Academy of Sciences, 295–325.Find this resource:

——— (2002). The theta system: An overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28.3: 229–90.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and Y. Grodzinsky (1993). The innateness of binding and coreference. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 69–101.Find this resource:

——— and E. Reuland (1991). Anaphors and logophors: An argument structure perspective. In J. Koster and E. Reuland (eds.), Long-distance anaphora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 283–321.Find this resource:

——— ——— (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 657–720.Find this resource:

——— and T. Siloni (1999). Against the unaccusative analysis of reflexives. MS, Tel Aviv.Find this resource:

Reis, M. (2000). On the parenthetical features of German wasω-constructions and how to account for them. In U. Lutz, G. Müller, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Wh-scope marking. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 249–70.Find this resource:

Reiss, C. (2008). The OCP and NoBanana. In B. Vaux and A. I. Nevins (eds.), Rules, constraints, and phonological phenomena. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 252–301.Find this resource:

Reuland, E. J. (2001). Primitives of binding. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 3.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Agreeing to bind. In H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinherz, and J. Koster (eds.), Organizing grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 505–13.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Long-distance binding in Germanic languages. In M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 3. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 85–108.Find this resource:

(p. 687) Reuland, E. J. (2008). Anaphoric dependencies: How are they encoded? Towards a derivation-based typology. In E. König and V. Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and typological explorations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 499–556.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Anaphora and language design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Rezac, M. (2008). Phi across modules. MS, University of the Basque Country and University of Nantes. http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/000765Find this resource:

Rice, C., and P. Svenonius (1998). Prosodic V2 in Northern Norwegian. Paper presented at the 17thWest Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, February.Find this resource:

Richards, M. D. (2004). Object shift and scrambling in North and West Germanic: A case study in symmetrical syntax. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Weak pronouns, object shift, andmultiple spell-out: Evidence for phases at the PF interface. In C. Boeckx (ed.), Minimalist essays. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 160–81.Find this resource:

——— (2007). On feature inheritance: An argument from the Phase Impenetrability Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 563–72.Find this resource:

——— (2008). Two kinds of variation in a Minimalist system. In F. Heck et al. (eds.), Varieties of competition. Linguistische Arbeitsberichte (Universität Leipzig), Band 87, 133–62.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Deriving the edge: What's in a phase. Syntax.Find this resource:

——— and T. Biberauer (2005). Explaining Expl. In M. den Dikken and C. Tortora (eds.), The function of function words and functional categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 115–53.Find this resource:

Richards, N. (1997). What moves where when in which language. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Find this resource:

——— (1998). The principle of minimal compliance. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 599–629.Find this resource:

——— (1999). Dependency formation and directionality of tree construction. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 34: 67–105.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Movement in language: Interactions and architectures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2002). Very local movement in a root-first derivation. In Epstein and Seely (2002c: 227–48).Find this resource:

——— (2006). A distinctness condition on linearization. MS, MIT.Find this resource:

A previous, shorter version appeared in

WCCFL 20 (2001): 470–83.Find this resource:

[Published as part of N. Richards (2010), Uttering trees. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Find this resource:

——— (2007). Lardil case stacking and the structural/inherent case distinction. MS, MIT. Available at: http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/000405Find this resource:

——— (2008). Wh-questions. In S. Miyagawa and M. Saito (eds.), Handbook of Japanese linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Richardson, J., and R. Chametzky (1985). A string based reformulation of C-command. NELS 15: 332–61.Find this resource:

Ries, J. (1927). Was ist Syntax? Ein kritischer Versuch, 2nd edn. Prague: Taussig & Taussig.Find this resource:

Ristad, E. (1993). The language complexity game. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Ritter, E., and S. T. Rosen (1998). Delimiting events in syntax. In M. Butt and W. Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 135–64.Find this resource:

Rivero, M.-L. (1991). Patterns of V-raising in long head movement, and negation: Serbo- Croatian vs. Slovak. Linguistic Review 8: 319–51.Find this resource:

——— (1993a). Long head movement vs. V2 and null subjects in Old Romance. Lingua 89: 113–41.Find this resource:

(p. 688) Rivero, M.-L. (1993b). Finiteness and second position in long head movement languages. MS, University of Ottawa.Find this resource:

——— (1994a). Negation, imperatives and Wackernagel effects. Rivista di linguistica 6: 91–118.Find this resource:

——— (1994b). Clause structure and V-movement in the languages of the Balkans. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12: 63–120.Find this resource:

——— (1997). On two locations for complement clitic pronouns: Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian and Old Spanish. In A. van Kemenade and N. Vincent (eds.), Parameters of morphosyntactic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 170–208.Find this resource:

——— and A. Terzi (1995). Imperatives, V-movement and logicalmood. Journal of Linguistics 31: 301–32.Find this resource:

Rizzi, L. (1978a). A restructuring rule in Italian syntax. In S. J. Keyser (ed.), Recent transformational studies in European languages. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 113–58.Find this resource:

——— (1978b). Violations of the wh-island constraint in Italian and the subjacency condition. Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics 11: 155–90.Find this resource:

——— (1982). Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

——— (1986). Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 501–57.Find this resource:

——— (1990a). On the anaphor-agreement effect. Rivista di linguistica 2: 27–42.Find this resource:

——— (1990b). Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (1996). Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. In A. Belletti and L. Rizzi (eds.) Parameters and functional heads: Essays in comparative syntax. New York: Oxford University Press, 63–90.Find this resource:

——— (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 281–337.Find this resource:

——— (2001a). Relativized Minimality effects. In M. Baltin and C. Collins (eds.), Handbook of contemporary syntactic theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 89–110.Find this resource:

——— (2001b). Extraction from weak islands, reconstruction, and agreement. In C. Chierchia, G. Guasti, and M. T. Cecchetto (eds.), Semantic interfaces. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 145–76.Find this resource:

——— (2004a). On the cartography of syntactic structures. In Rizzi (2004c: 3–15).Find this resource:

——— (2004b). Locality and left periphery. In Belletti (2004b: 223–51).Find this resource:

——— (ed.) (2004c). The structure of CP and IP: The cartography of syntactic structures, volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2006a). On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In L. L.-S. Cheng and N. Corver (eds.), Wh-movement: Moving on. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 97–133.Find this resource:

——— (2006b). On some properties of subjects and topics. In L. Brugè, G. Giusti, N. Munaro, W. Schweikert, and G. Turano (eds.), Contributions to the XXX Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, Cafoscarina, Venezia, 203–24.Find this resource:

——— (2006c). Grammatically-based target-inconsistencies in child language. In K. U. Deen, J. Nomura, B. Schulz, and B. D. Schwartz (eds.), The Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition-North America, Honolulu, HI. University of Connecticut Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 4, 2006, 19–49.Find this resource:

——— (2009). Movement and concepts of locality. In Piattelli-Palmarini et al. (2009: 155–68).Find this resource:

——— and I. Roberts (1989). Complex inversion in French. Probus 1: 1–30.Find this resource:

——— and U. Shlonsky (2007). Strategies of subject extraction. In U. Sauerland and H.-M. Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 115–60.Find this resource:

(p. 689) Robert, J. S. (2004). Embryology, epigenesis, and evolution: Taking development seriously. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Roberts, I. (1991). Excorporation and Minimality. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 209–18.Find this resource:

——— (2001). Head movement. In M. Baltin and C. Collins (eds.), Handbook of syntactic theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 113–47.Find this resource:

——— (2005). Principles and Parameters in VSO languages: A case study in Welsh. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Macroparameters, markedness, and typological drift. Presentation at TABU Dag, University of Groningen, June 6.Find this resource:

——— (forthcoming). Agreement and head movement: Clitics, incorporation and defective goals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— and A. Roussou (2003). Syntactic change: A minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Rochemont, M. (1989). Topic islands and the subjacency parameter. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 34: 145–70.Find this resource:

Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M. (2007). The syntax of objects: Agree and differential object marking. Ph.D. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Find this resource:

Roeper, T. (1999). Universal bilingualism. Language and Cognition 2: 169–86.Find this resource:

——— (2006). Watching NPs grow. In V. van Geenhoven (ed.), Acquisition meets semantics. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 81–114.Find this resource:

——— (2007). The prism of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

——— (2009a). Microscopic Minimalism. BU Plenary lecture Proceedings BU 33, Cascadilla Press.Find this resource:

——— (2009b). Vacate phase. MS, University of Massachusetts.Find this resource: