%% This BibTeX bibliography file was created using BibDesk.
%% http://bibdesk.sourceforge.net/


%% Created for kbj at 2008-07-21 21:09:43 -0400 


%% Saved with string encoding Western (ASCII) 


@article{Wurmbrand:2008,
	Author = {Wurmbrand, Susi},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:51:16 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:52:11 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {511--522},
	Title = {\emph{Nor}: Neither Disjunction nor Paradox},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Sabbagh:2008,
	Author = {Sabbagh, Joseph},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:50:08 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:51:02 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {502--511},
	Title = {Right Node Raising and Extraction in {T}agalog},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Madigan:2008,
	Author = {Madigan, Sean},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:49:06 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:50:01 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {493--502},
	Title = {Obligatory Split Control into Exhortative Complements in {K}orean},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{DAlessandro:2008,
	Author = {D'Alessandro, Roberta and Roberts, Ian},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:45:41 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:48:47 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {477--491},
	Title = {Movement and Agreement in {I}talian Past Participles and Defective Phases},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {In this article, we propose a phase-based alternative to Kayne's (1989) analysis of past participle agreement in Italian. This analysis captures the principal facts without making reference to specifier-head agreement. Instead, the possibility of overt past participle agreement is determined by the Phase Impenetrability Condition and is linked to the surface position of hte past participle. The analysis has interesting crosslinguistic implications, notably in that it predicts a general asymmetry between subject and object agreement.}}

@article{Kiss:2008,
	Author = {Kiss, Katalin {\'E}.},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:39:27 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:45:32 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {441--475},
	Title = {Free Word Order, (Non)configurationality, and Phases},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {The article argues that a particular implementation of phase theory makes it possible to account for seemingly contradictory facts of Hungarian that no other framework has been able to handle. Namely, (a) Hungarian word order is fixed preverbally and free postverbally. The fixed word order of a string is liberated when it is crossed by V-movement, (b) Grammatical phenomena sensitive to c-command provide evidence of both configurationality and nonconfigurationality. The proposal is based on the following assumptions: The derivatin of the Hungarian sentence involves a lexical phase (PredP) and a functional phase (a TP or a FocP), both headed by the raised V. When the functional phase is constructed, the silent lower copies ofhte V and their projections are deleted, which results in the flattening of the phasal domain. Grammatical phenomena indicative of a hierarchical structure are interpreted on the hierarchical domain of the lexical phase, whereas those indicative of a flat sturcture are interpreted on the flattened domain of the functional phase. The sister constituents of the flattened domain of the functional phase can be linearized in a free order in PF.}}

@article{Hayes:2008,
	Author = {Hayes, Bruce and Wilson, Colin},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:34:07 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:39:07 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {379--440},
	Title = {A Maximum Entropy Model of Phonotactics adn Phonotactic Learning},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {The study of phonotactics is a central topic in phonology. We propose a theory of phonotactic grammars and a learning algorithm that constructs such grammars from positive evidence. Our grammars consist of constraitns that are assigned numerical weights according to the principle of maximum entropy. The grammars assess possible words on the basis of the weighted sum of their constraint violations. The learning algorithm yields grammars that can capture both categorical and gradient phonotactic patterns. The algorithm is not provided with constraints in advance, but uses its own resources to form constraints and weight them. A baseline model, in which Universal Grammar is reduced to a feature set and an SPE-style constraint format, suffices to learn many phonotactic phenomena. In order for the model to learn nonlocal phenomena such as stress and vowel harmony, it must be augmented with autosegmental tiers and metrical grids. Our results thus offer novel, learning-theoretic support for such representations. We apply the model in a variety of learning simulations, showing that the learned grammars capture the distributional generalizations of these languages and accurately predict the findings of a phonotactic experiment.}}

@article{Friedmann:2008,
	Author = {Friedmann, Na'ama and Taranto, Gina and Shapiro, Lewis P. and Swinney, David},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:13:25 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-21 07:15:12 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {355--377},
	Title = {The Leaf Fell (the Leaf): The Online Processing of Unaccusatives},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {According to the Unaccusative Hypothesis, unaccusative subjects are base-generated in object position and move to the subject position. We examined this hypothesis using hte cross-modal lexical priming technique, which tests whether and when an antecedent is reactivated during the online processing of a sentence. We compared sentences containing unergative verbs with sentenes containing unaccusatives, both alternating and non-alternating, and found that subjects of unaccusative reactivate after the verb, while subjects of unergatives do not. Alternating unaccusatives showed a mixed pattern of reativation. The research direclty supports the Unaccusative Hypothesis.}}

@incollection{Taranto:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Taranto, Gina},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 12:06:53 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 12:07:49 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {329--350},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Discourse adjectives},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Bonami:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Bonami, Olivier and Godard, Dani{\`e}le},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 12:05:20 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 12:06:23 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {274--304},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Lexical semantics and pragmatics of evaluative adverbs},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Wyner:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Wyner, Adam Zachary},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 12:04:15 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 12:05:19 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {249--273},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Towards flexible types with constraints for manner and factive adverbs},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Katz:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Katz, Graham},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 12:03:13 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 12:04:03 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {220--248},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Manner modification of state verbs},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Pinon:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Pi{\~n}{\'o}n, Christopher},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 12:01:02 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 12:02:23 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {183--119},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Aspectual composition with degrees},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Kennedy:2008a,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Kennedy, Christopher and Levin, Beth},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 11:59:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 12:00:49 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {156--182},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Measure of change: The adjectival core of degree achievements},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Doetjes:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Doetjes, Jenny},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 11:58:16 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 11:59:31 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {123--155},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Adjectives and degree modification},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Morzycki:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Morzycki, Marcin},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-18 11:56:53 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-18 11:58:10 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {101--122},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Nonrestrictive modifers in non-parenthetical positions},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Demonte:2008,
	Author = {Demonte, Violeta},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-14 09:38:20 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-14 09:40:45 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {71--100},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Meaning-form correlations and adjective position in {S}panish},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Larson:2008,
	Author = {Larson, Richard and Yamakido, Hiroko},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-14 09:36:24 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-14 09:38:02 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {43--70},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Exafe and the deep position of nominal modifiers},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Svenonius:2008,
	Author = {Svenonius, Peter},
	Booktitle = {Adjectives and Adverbs},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-14 09:34:24 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-14 09:36:05 -0400},
	Editor = {McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher},
	Pages = {16--42},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {The position of adjectives and other phrasal modifiers in the decomposition of {DP}},
	Year = {2008}}

@book{Dayal:1996,
	Address = {Dordrecht},
	Author = {Dayal, Veneeta},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-16 12:38:22 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-16 12:40:15 -0400},
	Publisher = {Kluwer Academic Press},
	Title = {Locality in {Wh}-Quantification: Questions and Relative Clauses in {H}indi},
	Year = {1996}}

@article{Bhatt:2003,
	Author = {Bhatt, Rajesh},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-09 16:37:18 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-09 16:38:42 -0400},
	Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {485--541},
	Title = {Locality in {C}orrelatives},
	Volume = {21},
	Year = {2003},
	Abstract = {Correlativization seems to be an intrinsically non-local strategy, where the Correlative clause can appear discontinuous from the noun phrase it modifies. I show that correlative constructions in the Modem Indo-Aryan languages nevertheless display locality effects. The nature of these locality effects depends upon whether the correlative clause involves a single relativization ('Simple') or mutiple relativizations ('Multi-Head'). The generalization that emerges is that a Correlative clause must be merged as locally as possible to the phrase that it modifies. Simple correlatives modify DPs and so they start adjoined to the DP that they modify and then are fronted to an IP-adjoined position. Such an approach is able to explain the hitherto unexplained sensitivity of the correlative-modified phrase relationship to islands. Multi-Head Correlatives modify IPs and therefore they start adjoined to the smallest IP that contains the variables bound by the Multi-Head Correlative, followed by optional movement to the clause-initial position. My proposal argues that Simple Correlatives and Multi-Head Correlatives involve different derivational histories. This difference in derivational history is then used to account for the many differences in their syntactic behavior. Finally, the 'Condition on Local Merge' from which this analysis follows is shown to have cross-linguistic support}}

@webpage{Lechner:2007,
	Author = {Lechner, Winfried},
	Date-Added = {2008-07-09 15:45:07 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-11 06:51:07 -0400},
	Title = {Interpretive Effects of {H}ead {M}ovement},
	Urldate = {2007},
	Year = {2007},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz}}

@book{Williams:2003,
	Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts},
	Author = {Williams, Edwin},
	Date-Added = {2008-06-19 05:40:01 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-07 11:59:46 -0400},
	Publisher = {MIT Press},
	Title = {Representation Theory},
	Year = {2003}}

@article{Hoekstra:2002,
	Author = {Hoekstra, Jarich},
	Date-Added = {2008-06-18 12:18:09 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-06-18 12:19:08 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {227--259},
	Title = {Genitive Compounds in {F}risian as Lexical Phrases},
	Volume = {6},
	Year = {2002},
	Abstract = {This article investigates genitive compounds, a special type of NN compound found
in West Frisian and some other languages/dialects on the North Sea littoral. Genitive compounds
show a number of properties distinguishing them from normal NN compounds, the most striking
of which is the obligatory definiteness/specificity of their first element and, as a consequence,
of the compound as a whole. These properties can be accounted for if genitive compounds are
analyzed as phrases moving towards word status. Historically they derive from the Old Frisian
prenominal genitive construction, and it is shown that they still are a kind of prenominal genitive
construction today, albeit heavily lexicalized, i.e., subject to lexical principles and containing
specifically lexical elements. Since some of the phrasal elements in genitive compounds do not
occur in syntax proper and since their definiteness produces a blocking effect on normal NN
compounds, they seem to provide evidence for the concept of lexical phrases, potentially
productive phrasal patterns in the lexicon.}}

@article{Dikken:2002b,
	Author = {den Dikken, Marcel},
	Date-Added = {2008-06-18 12:16:41 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-06-18 12:17:43 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {169--225},
	Title = {Lexical Intergity, Checking, and the Mirror: A Checking Approach to Syntactic Word Formation},
	Volume = {6},
	Year = {2002},
	Abstract = {Admitting syntactic formation of morphologically complex words is commonly
deemed to be an infringement on the Lexical Integrity Hypothesis. But syntactic word formation,
if understood in terms of the checking of features of subparts of words in designated
syntactic positions, is readily reconciled with strong lexicalism. This paper will argue that a
checking approach to syntactic word formation, in tandem with a novel interpretation of the
Mirror Principle of Baker (1985), yields a straightforward resolution of the otherwise problematic
inflectional morphology of the Athapaskan languages, as well as of `bracketing
paradoxes' of the unhappier and ungrammaticality type. The syntactically complex structure
of unhappier and ungrammaticality that underlies the checking approach to syntactic word
formation is supported on the basis of evidence from polarity item licensing, adverbial modification,
and so-anaphora.}}

@article{Bobaljik:2002a,
	Author = {Bobaljik, Jonathan David},
	Date-Added = {2008-06-18 12:15:11 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-06-18 12:16:08 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {129--167},
	Title = {Realizing {G}ermanic Inflection: Why Morphology does not drive Syntax},
	Volume = {6},
	Year = {2002},
	Abstract = {This paper examines and evaluates what may be called the ``Rich Agreement
Hypothesis'' (RAH) in the domain of verb movement asymmetries in Germanic. The most prominent
current accounts (e.g., Rohrbacher's 1999 Morphology-Driven Syntax) require inspection
of the internal make-up of paradigms and take overt morphological variation to be the cause of
syntactic variation. A survey of the literature shows that these proposals are empirically untenable
in their strong (bi-conditional) form; there are numerous cases of syntactic variation attested
in the absence of corresponding morphological variation. The strongest sustainable descriptive
generalization is a one-way implication from rich morphology to verb movement. Though this
has been noted before, its implications have not been adequately discussed. While morphologydriven
approaches could have explained a strong RAH, when faced with the weaker, one-way
implication, they can provide no account of why that correlation should hold and are thus at best
incomplete. That is, they provide no insight as to why there are no languages with rich morphology
but in which the finite verb remains in the VP. The particular correlations that are
attested, and in particular the absence of a certain class of languages, do however follow from
a theory which takes morphology to be not the cause but rather a reflection of syntactic structure,
in line with common theorizing in morphology. The inflection-movement correlations that
do exist therefore challenge rather than support morphology-driven approaches to morphosyntax.}}

@article{Ackema:2002a,
	Author = {Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad},
	Date-Added = {2008-06-18 12:13:08 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-06-18 12:13:48 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {93--128},
	Title = {Syntactic Atomicity},
	Volume = {6},
	Year = {2002}}

@incollection{Hintikka:1969,
	Author = {Hintikka, Jaako},
	Booktitle = {Philosophical Logic},
	Date-Added = {2008-06-04 20:31:11 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-06-04 20:43:44 -0400},
	Editor = {Davis, J. W. and Hockney and Wilson},
	Pages = {21--45},
	Publisher = {Reidel},
	Title = {Semantics for Propositional Attitudes},
	Year = {1969}}

@incollection{Tomioka:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Tomioka, Satoshi},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:16:19 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:17:04 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {210--228},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {A step-by-step guide to ellipsis resolution},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Sauerland:2008a,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Sauerland, Uli},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:15:23 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:16:09 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {183--209},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {The silent content of bound variable pronouns},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Lechner:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Lechner, Winfried},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:14:04 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:14:50 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {154--182},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {On binding scope and ellipsis scope},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Merchant:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Merchant, Jason},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:12:17 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:13:19 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {132--153},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {Variable island repair under ellipsis},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Kennedy:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Kennedy, Christopher},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:11:32 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:12:12 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {95--131},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {Argument Contained Ellipsis},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Johnson:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:09:49 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:10:42 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {69--94},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {The view of {QR} from ellipsis},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Jacobson:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Jacobson, Pauline},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:08:13 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:09:40 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {30--68},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {Direct compositionality and variable-free semantics: the case of {A}ntecedent {C}ontained {D}eletion},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Hardt:2008,
	Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom},
	Author = {Hardt, Daniel},
	Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:06:25 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:08:05 -0400},
	Editor = {Johnson, Kyle},
	Pages = {15--29},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {{VP} Ellipsis and constraints on interpretation},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Nevins:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Nevins, Andrew},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:00:50 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:01:35 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {329--368},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Cross-Modular Parallels in the Study of {P}hon and {P}hi},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Bobaljik:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Bobaljik, Jonathan David},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:57:32 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:58:36 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {295--328},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Where's {P}hi? {A}greement as a Postsyntactic Operation},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Harley:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Harley, Heidi},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:56:15 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:59:19 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {251--294},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {When is a Syncretism more than a Syncretism?},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Trommer:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Trommer, Jochen},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:55:28 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:00:05 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {221--250},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Third {P}erson Marking in {M}enominee},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Harbour:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Harbour, Daniel},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:54:25 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:59:09 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {185--220},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Discontinuous Agreement and the {S}yntax-{M}orphology Interface},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{McGinnis:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {McGinnis, Martha},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:53:11 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:59:37 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {155--184},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Phi-Feature Competition in {M}orphology and {S}yntax},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Bejar:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:52:22 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:00:16 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {130--154},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Conditions on {P}hi-{A}gree},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Rezac:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Rez{\'a}c, Milan},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:50:45 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:59:50 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {83--129},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Phi-{A}gree and {T}heta-Related {C}ase},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Sauerland:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Sauerland, Uli},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:49:52 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:59:59 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {57--82},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {On the Semantic Markedness of {P}hi-Features},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Heim:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Heim, Irene},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:48:32 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 09:59:27 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {35--56},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Feature on Bound Pronouns},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Adger:2008,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Adger, David and Harbour, Daniel},
	Booktitle = {Phi Theory},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:45:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:00:25 -0400},
	Editor = {Harbour, Daniel and Adger, David and B{\'e}jar, Susana},
	Pages = {1--34},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Why {P}hi?},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Holmberg:2004,
	Author = {Holmberg, Anders and Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir, Thorbj{\"o}rg},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-22 17:16:26 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-22 17:19:20 -0400},
	Journal = {Lingua},
	Number = {5},
	Pages = {651--673},
	Title = {Agreement and movement in {I}celandic raising constructions},
	Volume = {114},
	Year = {2004},
	Abstract = {An intervening dative experiencer argument in an Icelandic raising verb construction blocks 
agreement between the matrix verb (the matrix T) and the embedded subject of the infinitival 
clause, as well as blocking raising of the embedded subject. If the experiencer is wh-moved (or 
relativized or topicalized), it still blocks agreement, but does not block raising. The facts show 
unequivocally that the whP moves directly from specVP to specCP. The facts are explained in 
terms of a theory of spell-out and the EPP: a whP is not spelled out before it enters an Agree 
relation with a C with a matching feature. Spelled-out or not, a whP in specVP blocks Agree 
between T and the embedded subject. A whP not spelled out does not block Stylistic Fronting, 
an EPP-driven movement affecting only spelled-out categories. Raising across a whP is 
claimed to be Stylistic Fronting, not standard A-movement. }}

@article{Felser:2004,
	Author = {Felser, Claudia},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-22 17:12:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-22 17:15:42 -0400},
	Journal = {Lingua},
	Number = {5},
	Pages = {543--574},
	Title = {Wh-copying, phases, and successive cyclicity},
	Volume = {114},
	Year = {2004},
	Abstract = {This paper re-examines the wh-copying phenomenon that is attested in a number of
languages including German, Frisian, Afrikaans, and Romani, in the context of Chomsky's
(Chomsky, N., 1998. Minimalist inquiries: the framework. MIT Occasional Papers in
Linguistics 15. MITWPL, Cambridge, MA) phase-based approach to syntactic derivation.
Wh-copying is traditionally thought to provide strong evidence for the successive-cyclic nature
of wh-movement. Besides the more general problem of how intermediate movement steps are
formally triggered, however, the wh-copying phenomenon raises the questions of what grammatical
condition or conditions should permit (or possibly, force) the phonetic realisation of
intermediate wh-copies, why the spelling-out of locally uninterpretable copies of a wh-operator
does not cause the derivation to crash at the phase level, and to what extent their presence
poses a problem for the principle of Full Interpretation and for Kayne's (Kayne, R., 1994.
The Antisymmetry of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Linear Correspondence Axiom.
It is shown that an analysis of wh-copying in terms of the discontinuous spelling-out of a
wh-expression's `operator' and `core' parts, in conjunction with a convergence-based view of
phases, not only helps provide answers to the above questions, but also accounts for some
otherwise difficult-to-explain restrictions on wh-copying.}}

@article{Son:2008,
	Author = {Son, Minjeong and Cole, Peter},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-06 09:29:12 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-06 09:30:28 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {120--160},
	Title = {An Event-Based Account of \emph{-kan} Constructions in {S}tandard {I}ndonesian},
	Volume = {84},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {A widely held position in the literature on verbal meaning is that the lexical-semantic representation of verbsinvolvescomplex event structureswith semantic primitiveslike CAUSE and BECOME (e.g. Dowty 1979). A growing number of recent workson predicate decomposition have shown that there is a close correlation between the semantics of event structure and the syntax (e.g. Hale & Keyser 1993, Harley 1995, Travis 2000, van Hout 2000, Ramchand 2003, 2007). Thisarticle presentsan additional empirical argument for the view that there isa direct mapping between semantic decomposition of predicates and the (morpho)syntax by developing an explicit analysis of the semantics and syntax of the verbal suffix -kan in Standard Indonesian. We argue that -kan isa morphological reflex of the RESULT head, the semantics of which givesris e to a causative interpretation. By treating -kan as being sensitive to a syntactic configuration involving a result state, the current analysis not only provides important empirical support for the event decomposition of predicates in the syntax but also leads to a unified semantic and syntactic account of -kan, which captures straightforwardly distributional properties of the suffix.}}

@article{Mithun:2008,
	Author = {Mithun, Marianne},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-06 09:27:30 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-06 09:28:41 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {69--119},
	Title = {The Extension of Dependency Beyond the Sentence},
	Volume = {84},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {This article examines several grammatical developments that have received relatively little attention, but that may be more pervasive than previously recognized. They involve the functional extension of markers of grammatical dependency from sentence-level syntax into larger discourse and pragmatic domains. Such developments are first illustrated with material from Navajo and Central Alaskan Yup'ik, then surveyed more briefly in several other unrelated languages. In some cases, secondary effects of such changes can reshape basic clause structure. An awareness of these processes can accordingly aid in understandingcertain recurringbut hitherto unexplained arrays of basic morphological and syntactic patterns, exemplified here with cases of homophonous grammatical markers and of ergative/accusative splits. Like developments described by Gildea (1997, 1998) and Evans (2007), they involve the use of dependent clauses as independent sentences, but the processes described here differ from those in both the mechanisms at work and their results.}}

@article{Collins:2008,
	Author = {Collins, Chris and Moody, Simanique and Postal, Paul M.},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-06 09:26:02 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-06 09:27:11 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {29--68},
	Title = {An {AAE} Camouflage Construction},
	Volume = {84},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {Spears 1998 discusses a use of the word ass in African American English (AAE) in sentences like They done arrested her stupid ass and I'm gonna sue her ass. We refer to DPs like her stupid ass generically as the ACC (ass CAMOUFLAGE CONSTRUCTION), and we view the ACC as an instance of a universal grammatical phenomenon we call CAMOUFLAGE. The ACC is also attested in non- AAE dialects of American English (Beavers & Koontz-Garboden 2006a).

For certain syntactic properties, the possessor of the ACC behaves as if it were external to the larger DP (e.g. binding, control, selection); for others, it behaves as if it were internal to the larger DP (e.g. finite verb agreement, traditional constituent-structure tests). To account for this dual behavior, we propose that the ACC possessor DP originates in a position external to the ACC, and moves into its possessor position.

We discuss the implications of our analysis for other areas of AAE syntax, including the resumptive-with construction, a previously undocumented grammatical phenomenon, and the use of self in various constructions, which we suggest are illuminated by the notion camouflage. We briefly consider arguable instances of camouflage crosslinguistically in languages such as Georgian, French, the Mayan languages K'ekchi and Tzotzil, and Yoruba. Genuine similarities between the ACC and these other constructions support our perspective on the ACC.}}

@article{Jackendoff:2008,
	Author = {Jackendoff, Ray},
	Date-Added = {2008-05-06 09:22:45 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-05-06 09:25:40 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {8--28},
	Title = {\emph{Construction After Construction} and Its Theoretical Challenges},
	Volume = {84},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {The English NPN construction, exemplified by construction after construction, is productive
with five prepositions---by, for, to, after, and upon---with a variety of meanings, including succession,
juxtaposition, and comparison; it also has numerous idiomatic cases. This mixture of regularity
and idiosyncrasy lends itself to an account in the spirit of construction grammar, in which the
lexicon includes specified syntactic structures matched with meanings. The internal syntactic
structure of NPN violates standard principles of phrase structure, and the required identity of the
two nouns (in most cases) presents descriptive difficulties. Furthermore, when NPN appears in
NP positions, it can take normal NP complements and modifiers, and it has quantificational
semantics despite the absence of a lexical quantifier. These peculiarities collectively present
interesting challenges to linguistic theory. The best hope lies in a theory of grammar that (i)
recognizes meaningful constructions as theoretical entities; (ii) recognizes a continuum of regularity
between words and rules; and (iii) recognizes the autonomy of syntax from semantics and
vice versa.}}

@article{Vermeulen:2008,
	Author = {Vermeulen, Reiko},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:11:08 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:12:50 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {345--354},
	Title = {Nonconstituent Coordination in {J}apanese: A Case of Phonological Reordering},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Pater:2008,
	Author = {Pater, Joe},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:09:50 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:12:05 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {334--345},
	Title = {Gradual Learning and Convergence},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Gajewski:2008,
	Author = {Gajewski, Jon},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:08:06 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:09:43 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {327--334},
	Title = {On the Semantics of {H}indi-{U}rdu Multiple Correlatives},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Takahashi:2008,
	Author = {Takahashi, Daiko},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:07:00 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:07:59 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {307--326},
	Title = {Quantificational Null Objects and Argument Ellipsis},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {This article provides a new argument for the analysis of null arguments
in terms of ellipsis by considering null objects that behave like quantifiers.
It is shown that the presence of quantificational null objects and
their scopal property are difficult to accommodate under the traditional
view of null arguments as pronouns but are best accounted for by the
ellipsis analysis. Among the consequences of the present study are the
need to postulate phonetically invisible/inaudible scrambling and its
obedience to the economy requirement.}}

@article{Kim:2008,
	Author = {Kim, Kwan-sup},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:04:57 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:06:34 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {295--307},
	Title = {English {C} Moves Downward as well as Upward: An Extension of {B}o\v{s}kovi{\`c} and {L}asnik's (2003) Approach},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Gracanin-Yuksek:2008,
	Author = {Gra{\v{c}}anin-Yuksek, Martina},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:02:48 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:04:18 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {275--294},
	Title = {Free Relatives in {C}roatian: An Argument for the Comp Account},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {The article argues for the Comp account (e.g., Groos and Van Riemsdijk
1981) over the head account (e.g., Bresnan and Grimshaw 1978)
of free relatives (FRs), on the basis of several converging arguments
from Croatian. Evidence from reconstruction effects shows that the
wh-phrase introducing a free relative (WHFR) originates inside the
relative clause and wh-moves to its surface position. In addition, arguments
from clitic placement show that the derived position of the
WHFR is no higher than Spec,CP of the FR.}}

@article{Copley:2008,
	Author = {Copley, Bridget},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 17:01:19 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:02:26 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {261--274},
	Title = {The Plan's the Thing: Deconstructing Futurate Meanings},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {A futurate is a sentence with no obvious means of future reference,
which conveys that a future-oriented eventuality is planned or scheduled.
I argue that the component of planning found in the meaning of
futurates should be derived from the more familiar modal concepts
of abilities and desires. A futurate statement presupposes that some
contextually salient entity d, the director, has the ability to bring it
about that p, and asserts that d is committed to bringing it about that p.}}

@article{Idrissi:2008,
	Author = {Idrissi, Ali and Prunet, Jean-Francois and B{\'e}land, Ren{\'e}e},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 16:59:39 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 17:01:11 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {221--259},
	Title = {On the Mental Representation of {A}rabic Roots},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {In Prunet, Beland, and Idrissi 2000, we presented evidence from an
aphasic subject that argued for the morphemic status of Arabic consonantal
roots. We predicted that inaudible glides in weak roots should
resurface in metathesis and template selection errors, but at the time
the relevant data were unattested. Here, we present such data, obtained
from a new series of experiments with the same aphasic subject. Arabic
hypocoristic formation offers another case of glide resurfacing. Both
sources of data confirm that Arabic consonantal roots are abstract
morphemic units rather than surface phonetic units.}}

@article{Elbourne:2008,
	Author = {Elbourne, Paul},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-25 16:55:52 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-25 16:59:13 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {191--220},
	Title = {Ellipsis Sites as Definite Descriptions},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {This article analyzes three phenomena that are troublesome for some
theories of ellipsis: the existence of sloppy readings when the relevant
pronouns cannot possibly be bound; cases where the antecedent of
ellipsis does itself contain an ellipsis site, but in resolving the larger
ellipsis the interpretation understood at the ellipsis site in the antecedent
is not used; and cases where an ellipsis site draws upon material
from two or more separate antecedents. These cases are accounted for
by an analysis of silent VPs and NPs that makes them into higherorder
definite descriptions that can be bound into.}}

@article{Paul:2008,
	Author = {Paul, Ileana},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-24 08:51:27 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-24 08:51:58 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {91--124},
	Title = {On the Topic of Pseudoclefts},
	Volume = {11},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {This paper presents arguments in favor of a pseudocleft analysis of a certain
class of sentences in Malagasy, despite the lack of an overt wh-element. It is shown that
voice morphology on the verb creates an operator-variable relationship much like the
one created by wh-movement in free relatives in English and other languages. The bulk
of the paper argues in favor of an inversion analysis of specificational pseudoclefts in
Malagasy: a predicate DP is fronted to a topic position from within a small clause
constituent. Moreover, it is shown that the same inversion occurs in equative and
specificational sentences in Malagasy, which suggests that these types of sentences
share the same syntactic structure. The proposed analysis also provides support for the
view that specificational pseudoclefts have a topic > focus structure, where the
wh-clause has been overtly topicalized.}}

@article{Matushansky:2008,
	Author = {Matushansky, Ora},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-24 08:50:02 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-24 08:50:31 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {26--90},
	Title = {On the Attributive Nature of Superlatives},
	Volume = {11},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {The standard view of superlatives treats them as a subkind of adjectives.
However, in many languages, superlatives require the presence of a determiner, even in
the predicate position. This leads to an apparent contradiction, since it is independently
known that determiners syntactically combine with extended NP projections and are
excluded with APs. This issue is resolved if superlative adjectives always appear in an
attributive (modificational) position. Superlative phrases without an overt noun (e.g., in
the predicative position) modify a null head noun. I show that this hypothesis
immediately explains the restrictions on the distribution of superlatives in languages as
diverse as Russian, French, German, Dutch, Breton, Spanish and Portuguese. I propose
that the modificational nature of superlative adjectives can be derived from their
semantics, and I argue that such a proposal yields a natural explanation of the behavior
of superlatives in Hebrew and Persian. Finally, I discuss the interaction between this
theory and the standard, movement-based analyses of comparatives and superlatives
and provide an explanation for apparent counterexamples.}}

@article{Leu:2008,
	Author = {Leu, Thomas},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-24 08:48:17 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-24 08:48:55 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {1--25},
	Title = {\emph{What for} Internally},
	Volume = {11},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {The present paper is concerned with the internal structure of Germanic what
for phrases. A comparative look at what for across Dutch, German, Norwegian,
Swedish, and Swiss German leads to a drastic revision of the traditional view on what
for. The proposal recognizes an (often silent) functional nominal SORT as a constitutive
part of the what for construction. For is analyzed as a prepositional complementizer
whose complement contains the (silent) nominal and the trace of what, to which for
assigns accusative Case. The projection of for, forP, is argued to sit in a specifier
position in the extended projection of the head noun, similar to adjectival modifiers on
a Cinquean view. What moves out of forP into the left periphery of the noun phrase.}}

@article{Guasti:2008,
	Author = {Guasti, Maria Teresa and Gavarr{\'o}, Anna and Lange, Joke de and Caprin, Claudia},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-24 08:40:24 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-24 08:41:53 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {89--119},
	Title = {Article Omission Across Child Languages},
	Volume = {15},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {Article omission is known to be a feature of early grammar, although it does not affect all child languages to the same extent. In this article we analyze the production of articles by 12 children, 4 speakers of Catalan, 4 speakers of Italian, and 4 speakers of Dutch. We consider the results in the light of (i) the adult input to the children are exposed to, (ii) the prosodic properties of articles in the three langauges, and (iii) the properties of hte syntax-semantics mapping of nouns in the languages under consideration. We show that the proportion of bare nouns (grammatical or ungrammatical) in the adult input does not bear any systematic relation to child procuditon/omission of articles and that the full developmental pattern observed can be explained by appealing to the role of the nominal mapping paramter (NMP) in guiding acquisition, in conjunction with prosodic properties of articles and with discourse conditions.}}

@article{Pirvulescu:2008,
	Author = {Pirvulescu, Mihaela and Belzil, Isabelle},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-24 08:34:49 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-24 08:36:22 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {75--88},
	Title = {The Acquisition of Past Participle Agreement in {Q}u{\'e}bec {F}rench {L1}},
	Volume = {15},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {Much developmental work has been devoted tot he acquisition of object clitics in French. There is a consensus that in early grammar, children omit object clitics in contexs where an adult would not. Several analyses have been put forth, among which, one proposing a close link between the omission of object clitics and the presence of past participle agreement. In this short article we address this hypothesis by examining the acquisition of past participle agreement through two sentence-preference tasks administered to children (3- to 5-year olds divided into three age groups) and adults from the Montr{\'e}al area. The results of the experiments show that past participle agreement is a marginal feature in early grammar and therefore too weak to be considered as a controlling the realization of the direct object clitics in child production. Children and adults display different behavior with respect to past participle agreement (weak and optional) versus subject-verb agreement (consistently strong and obligatory). This result points toward an analysis of past participle agreement in terms of language-specific optional verb movement.}}

@article{Corver:2008,
	Author = {Corver, Norbert},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-22 13:59:19 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-22 14:00:08 -0400},
	Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {43--93},
	Title = {Uniformity and diversity in the syntax of evaluative vocatives},
	Volume = {11},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {This article investigates the internal syntax of evaluative vocative
expressions (e.g., You idiot!). This construction superficially consists of a second person pronoun and an epithet noun. It turns out that this construction type has different morphosyntactic manifestations across languages/dialects (abstractly: youNOM idiot!; youACC/OBL idiot!; your idiot!). The paper aims at giving a uniform account for the `underlying' syntax of this construction type. It is argued that this construction has the `underlying' syntax of a possessive noun phrase. More particularly, the second person pronoun starts out as (part of) a PP-predicate and undergoes leftward predicate displacement within the vocative noun phrase. The major dimensions of (morpho)syntactic diversity are related to the following properties: (1) the nature of the predicate displacement operation involved (i.e., predicate inversion and/or predicate fronting); (2) the overtness versus covertness of the small clause head X, which is part of the vocative expression; (3) the case form of the second person pronoun. According to the structural analysis proposed in this article, evaluative vocative expressions form a further illustration of the structural uniformity that is hidden behind superficial diversity.}}

@article{Roehrs:2008,
	Author = {Roehrs, Dorian},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-22 13:56:35 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-22 13:57:35 -0400},
	Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {1--42},
	Title = {Something inner- and cross-linguistically different},
	Volume = {11},
	Year = {2008},
	Abstract = {Pronominal constructions such as something big, often referred to as the
`indefinite pronoun construction', have received different but often homogenous accounts in the literature. In this paper, I document the inner-and cross-linguistic diversity of this construction in German and some other languages. Highlighting respectively different sets of properties, I argue that there are three basic types: one type combines the adjective and the pronoun by complementation, another by adjunction, and a third involves a garden-variety DP. Adjunction is argued to be mediated by a Modifier Phrase (Rubin, E.J., Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, CSLI, Stanford, 429--439, 1996). The latter assumption is shown to have a number of advantages.}}

@phdthesis{Vergnaud:1974,
	Author = {Vergnaud, Jean-Roger},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-10 17:25:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-10 17:26:19 -0400},
	School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology},
	Title = {French Relative Clauses},
	Year = {1974}}

@article{Schachter:1973,
	Author = {Schachter, Paul},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-10 17:22:07 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-10 17:22:58 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {19--46},
	Title = {Focus and Relativization},
	Volume = {49},
	Year = {1973}}

@article{Henderson:2006,
	Author = {Henderson, Brent},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-08 17:12:45 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-08 17:13:27 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {275--289},
	Title = {Multiple Agreement and Inversion in {B}antu},
	Volume = {9},
	Year = {2006},
	Abstract = {Carstens (2001) argues that multiple agreement constructions in Bantu arise
through raising of the subject through each verb's specifier. This paper argues against this account, providing evidence from relative inversion that subjects move directly from their base position to their final position with no intermediate stops. It is argued that these facts are consistent with a Multiple Agree analysis in which agreement on participle verbs is parasitic on the theta-features of their selecting auxiliary verbs. Carstens's arguments against Chomsky's (2000, 2001) system of theta-complete Case checking are also discussed and a new argument against Chomsky's system is presented that demands theta and Case feature checking relations be divorced. Data come
from Swahili and Kirundi.}}

@article{Craenenbroeck:2006a,
	Author = {Craenenbroeck, Jeroen van and Lipt{\'a}k, Anik{\'o}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-08 17:10:04 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-08 17:11:50 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {248--274},
	Title = {The Crosslinguistic Syntax of {S}luicing: Evidence from {H}ungarian Relatives},
	Volume = {9},
	Year = {2006},
	Abstract = {This paper deals with an elliptical construction in Hungarian that to our
knowledge has not received any attention in the theoretical literature so far. It involves the deletion of a relative clause with the exclusion of the relative pronoun and one more remaining constituent. We show that this construction should be analyzed as an instance of sluicing. The theoretical approach we provide for these sentences is an adapted version of Merchant's (2001) implementation of sluicing in terms of an [e]-feature that is responsible for the deletion process. Our extension of this proposal involves the modification of the syntactic subcontent of this [e]-feature. We show that languages where question words are found in the operator domain of the left periphery use a version of the [e]-feature that attaches to heads whose specifier is occupied by an operator. This predicts that sluicing not only occurs with wh-remnants but more widely with operator remnants as well. With this proposal we lay the foundation for a crosslinguistic taxonomy of sluicing constructions, and open new avenues towards explaining root/embedded asymmetries in some as yet ill-understood elliptical phenomena in English.}}

@article{Citko:2006,
	Author = {Citko, Barbara},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-08 17:07:05 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-08 17:08:14 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {225--247},
	Title = {The Interaction between {A}cross-the-{B}oard \emph{wh}-Movement and Left-Branch Extraction},
	Volume = {9},
	Year = {2006},
	Abstract = {This paper explores the interaction between two independently well studied
wh-movement strategies: across-the-board wh-movement and left-branch extraction. Focusing on Slavic languages, which allow both ATB movement and left-branch extraction in isolation, it shows that ATB left-branch extraction is subject to a rather surprising restriction: the   remnants   inside the second conjunct must be distinct from their   correspondents   inside the first conjunct. The account of this restriction developed in this paper relies on the interaction of two independently motivated principles: the Linear Correspondence Axiom of Kayne 1994 and a structural economy condition formulated within the framework of Chomsky's (1995) Minimalist Program.}}

@article{Tungseth:2007,
	Author = {Tungseth, Mai},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:44:57 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:45:35 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {187--228},
	Title = {Benefactives across {S}candinavian},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Jensen:2007,
	Author = {Jensen, Britta},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:43:58 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:44:52 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {163--185},
	Title = {In favour of a truncated imperative clause structure: evidence from adverbs},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Julien:2007,
	Author = {Julien, Marit},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:43:15 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:43:55 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {103--161},
	Title = {Embedded {V2} in {N}orwegian and {S}wedish},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Rosenkvist:2007,
	Author = {Rosenkvist, Henrik},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:42:20 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:43:05 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {77--102},
	Title = {Subject Doubling in {O}evdalian},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Hroarsdottir:2007,
	Author = {Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir, Thorbj{\"o}rg and Wiklund, Anna-Lena and Bentzen, Kristine and Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:40:42 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:41:53 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {45--75},
	Title = {The afterglow of verb movement},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Abraham:2007,
	Author = {Abraham, Werner and Leiss, Elisabeth},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:39:16 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:40:17 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {17--44},
	Title = {On the interfaces between (double) definiteness, aspect, and word orderin {O}ld and {M}odern {S}candinavian},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Boskovic:2007a,
	Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:38:16 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:39:03 -0400},
	Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax},
	Pages = {1--15},
	Title = {Don't feed your movements: Object shift in {I}celandic},
	Volume = {80},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{OGrady:2008,
	Author = {O'Grady, William and Yamashita, Yoshie and Cho, Sookeum},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:36:00 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:37:47 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {58--68},
	Title = {Object Drop in {J}apanese and {K}orean},
	Volume = {15},
	Year = {2008}}

@article{Kehoe:2008,
	Author = {Kehoe, Margaret and Hilaire-Debove, Geraldine and Le{\'o}, Conxita},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 18:31:20 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 18:35:21 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {5--57},
	Title = {The Structure of Branching Onsets and Rising Diphthongs: Evidence from the Acquisition of {F}rench and {S}panish},
	Volume = {15},
	Year = {2008}}

@incollection{Neidle:2002,
	Author = {Neidle, Carol and MacLaughlin, Dawn},
	Booktitle = {Functional Structure in {DP} and {IP}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 13:54:31 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 13:55:37 -0400},
	Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo},
	Pages = {194--224},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {The Cartography of Syntactic Structures},
	Title = {The Distribution of Functional Projections in {ASL}: Evidence from Overt Expressions of Syntactic Features},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {2002}}

@incollection{Guasti:2002,
	Author = {Guasti, Maria Teresa and Rizzi, Luigi},
	Booktitle = {Functional Structure in {DP} and {IP}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 13:53:19 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 13:54:24 -0400},
	Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo},
	Pages = {167--194},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {The Cartography of Syntactic Structures},
	Title = {Agreement and Tense as Distinct Syntactic Positions: Evidence from Acquisition},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {2002}}

@incollection{Cardinaletti:2002,
	Author = {Cardinaletti, Anna and Roberts, Ian},
	Booktitle = {Functional Structure in {DP} and {IP}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 13:52:14 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 13:53:15 -0400},
	Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo},
	Pages = {123--166},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {The Cartography of Syntactic Structures},
	Title = {Clause Structure and X-Second},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {2002}}

@incollection{Scott:2002,
	Author = {Scott, Gary-John},
	Booktitle = {Functional Structure in {DP} and {IP}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 13:51:01 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 13:52:07 -0400},
	Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo},
	Pages = {91--122},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {The Cartography of Syntactic Structures},
	Title = {Stacked Adjectival Modivication and the Structure of Nominal Phrases},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {2002}}

@incollection{Giusti:2002,
	Author = {Giusti, Giuliana},
	Booktitle = {Functional Structure in {DP} and {IP}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 13:49:23 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 13:50:55 -0400},
	Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo},
	Pages = {54--90},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {The Cartography of Syntactic Structures},
	Title = {The Functional Structure of {N}oun {P}hrases: A Bare Phrase Structure Approach},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {2002}}

@incollection{Bruge:2002,
	Author = {Brug{\'e}, Laura},
	Booktitle = {Functional Structure in {DP} and {IP}},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 13:47:21 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 13:49:15 -0400},
	Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo},
	Pages = {15--53},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {The Cartography of Syntactic Structures},
	Title = {The Positions of Demonstratives in the Extended Nominal Projection},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {2002}}

@book{Roberts:2005,
	Address = {Oxford},
	Author = {Roberts, Ian G.},
	Date-Added = {2008-04-06 08:41:18 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-04-06 08:42:44 -0400},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Series = {Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax},
	Title = {Principles and Parameters in a {VSO} Language: A Case Study in {W}elsh},
	Year = {2005}}

@book{Kathol:2000a,
	Author = {Kathol, Andreas},
	Date-Added = {2008-03-25 14:40:53 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-03-25 14:41:42 -0400},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Linear Syntax},
	Year = {2000}}

@inproceedings{Lakoff:1986,
	Author = {Lakoff, George},
	Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 22},
	Date-Added = {2008-03-24 21:33:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-03-24 21:35:56 -0400},
	Editor = {Farley, Anne M. and Farley, Peter T. and McCullough, Karl-Erik},
	Pages = {152--167},
	Title = {Frame semantic control of the {C}oordinate {S}tructure {C}onstraint},
	Year = {1986}}

@article{Grosu:1973,
	Author = {Grosu, Alexander},
	Date-Added = {2008-03-24 21:30:17 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-03-24 21:31:11 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {88--92},
	Title = {On the nonunitary nature of the {C}oordinate {S}tructure {C}onstraint},
	Volume = {4},
	Year = {1973}}

@inproceedings{Goldsmith:1985,
	Author = {Goldsmith, John},
	Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 21},
	Date-Added = {2008-03-24 21:27:37 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-03-24 21:29:52 -0400},
	Editor = {Eilfort, William H. and Kroeber, Paul D. and Peterson, Karen L.},
	Pages = {133--143},
	Title = {A principled exception to the {C}oordinate {S}tructure {C}onstraint},
	Year = {1985}}

@book{Chomsky:1964a,
	Author = {Chomsky, Noam},
	Date-Added = {2008-03-24 20:01:13 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-03-24 20:03:55 -0400},
	Publisher = {Mouton \& Company},
	Title = {Current issues in linguistic theory},
	Year = {1964}}

@article{Wurmbrand:2007,
	Author = {Wurmbrand, Susi},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-31 10:04:16 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-01-31 10:05:16 -0500},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {243-288},
	Title = {How Complex are Complex Predicates},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This paper argues that clause union/restructuring constructions such as verb
clusters in German do not involve head clustering in the form of (lexical or derived)
complex head formation. I provide several arguments showing that clause union
properties are licensed in the absence of complex head formation and that complex
head formation hence cannot be seen as a condition on clause union/restructuring.
Complex head approaches are compared to syntactic complementation approaches---in particular, to an approach where the verbs of a restructuring construction project
independent VPs that include all the internal arguments associated with the particular
verbs. A series of empirical facts are considered (constituency, word order,
modification, event structure properties, and nominalizations) that all point to the
conclusion that these constructions involve regular VPs rather than complex V-V
heads. Although it is not excluded that complex head approaches could be adjusted to
accommodate these facts, the main advantage of the VP-complementation approach is
that the sum of the properties discussed follows without additional assumptions from
the structure suggested and that this approach also correctly predicts which
constructions are excluded.}}

@article{Harbour:2007,
	Author = {Harbour, Daniel},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-31 09:59:53 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-01-31 10:01:00 -0500},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {223--242},
	Title = {Against {PersonP}},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Emphatic verb doubling, developed as a diagnostic of T-to-C movement in
Classical Hebrew, demonstrates that discontinuous agreement is not a consequence of
movement to between hypothetical Person and Number phrases}}

@article{Stjepanovic:2007,
	Author = {Stjepanovi\'{c}, Sandra},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:32:17 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {179--190},
	Title = {P-Stranding under {S}luicing in a Non-{P}-Stranding Language?},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Merchant:2007a,
	Author = {Merchant, Jason},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:30:34 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {169--179},
	Title = {An Asymmetry in Voice Mismatches in{VP}-Ellipsis and {P}seudogapping},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{McNally:2007,
	Author = {McNally, Louise},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:28:58 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {161--169},
	Title = {{DP}-Internal \emph{Only}, Amount Relatives, and Relatives Out of Existentials},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Sobin:2007,
	Author = {Sobin, Nicholas},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:27:44 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {147--160},
	Title = {\emph{Do So} and {VP}},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Culicover and Jackendoff (2005) argue that VP structure with adjunct modifiers is ``flat'': both complements and adjuncts are equally sisters of V. Their arguments center around the apparent misbehavior of do so as a replacement for a syntactic VP constituent. However, several of these arguments are inconclusive. The rule that Culicover and Jackendoff offer for do so does not fare better overall than does the hierarchic VP account of do so.}}

@article{MacDonald:2007,
	Author = {MacDonald, Jonathan E.},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:26:18 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {128--147},
	Title = {Domain of Aspectual Interpretation},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Thompson (2006) argues for a syntactic account of telicity in which DPs and PPs check a [bounded] feature at an AspP projection above vP to create a telic predicate. I provide evidence for an AspP projection between vP and VP and argue that AspP and everything AspP dominates defines a domain of aspectual interpretation, a syntactic space within which elements must be located in order to affect the telicity of a predicate. I provide data showingthat elements above AspP cannot affect aspectual interpretation. These data pose a serious problem for Thompson's account.}}

@article{Hazout:2007,
	Author = {Hazout, Ilan},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:24:17 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {117--128},
	Title = {On the Rleation between Expletive \emph{There} and Its Associate: A Reply to {W}illiams},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {The relation between expletive there and its associate involves agreement, as suggested in Hazout 2004, and not theta-role assignment, as suggested in Williams 1994, 2006. This difference reflects radically different assumptions about the nature of the subject-predicate relation. The analysis in Hazout 2004 provides a superior account of the empirical facts and affords insights that are missed by the account in Williams 1994.}}

@article{Darzi:2007,
	Author = {Darzi, Ali},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:22:58 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {103--116},
	Title = {On the vP Analysis of {P}ersian Finite Control Constructions},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Ghomeshi (2001) proposes an account of Persian subject control constructions in terms of a reduced vP complement to the control verb, followinga proposal made by Wurmbrand (2001). Faced with the fact that the complement of the control verb is headed by what has been treated in the linguistic literature on Persian as the complementizer ke `that', she suggests that ke, in this construction, is a clitic hosted by the matrix control verb. However, closer examination of the claimed ``restructuring'' construction, the distribution of temporal adverbials, and ke-cliticization in Persian militates against such a proposal.}}

@article{Legate:2007a,
	Author = {Legate, Julie Anne},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:21:35 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {55--101},
	Title = {Morphological and Abstract Case},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article examines the relationship between abstract and morphological case, arguing that morphological case realizes abstract Case features in a postsyntactic morphology, according to the Elsewhere Condition.Aclass of prima facie ergative-absolutive languages is identified wherein intransitive subjects receive abstract nominative Case and transitive objects receive abstract accusative Case; these are realized through a morphological default, which is often mislabeled as absolutive. Further support comes from split ergativity based on a nominal hierarchy, which is shown to have a morphological source. Proposals that case and agreement are purely morphological phenomena are critiqued.}}

@article{Embick:2007a,
	Author = {Embick, David and Marantz, Alec},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:20:16 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {1--53},
	Title = {Architecture and Blocking},
	Volume = {39},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {We discuss theoretical approaches to blocking effects, with particular emphasis on cases in which words appear to block phrases (and perhaps vice versa). These approaches share at least one intuition: that syntactic and semantic features create possible ``cells'' or slots in which particular items can appear, and that blocking occurs when one such cell is occupied by one form as opposed to another. Accounts of blocking differ along two primary dimensions: the size of the objects that compete with one another (morphemes, words, phrases, sentences); and whether or not ungrammatical forms are taken into consideration in determining the correct output (relatedly, whether otherwise wellformed objects are marked ungrammatical by competition). We argue that blocking in the sense of competition for the expression of syntactic or semantic features is limited to insertion of the phonological exponents of such features (the Vocabulary items of Distributed Morphology) at terminal nodes from the syntax. There is thus no blocking at the word level or above, and no competition between grammatical and ungrammatical structures. The architectural significance of these points is emphasized throughout the discussion.}}

@article{Pope:2007,
	Author = {Pope, Jennifer and Meyerhoff, Miriam and Ladd, D. Robert},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:16:02 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:44 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {615--627},
	Title = {Forty years of language change on {M}artha's {V}ineyard},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This short report presents results from a replication of Labov's study of language variation and language change in progress on Martha's Vineyard (MV). The original paper was revolutionary in many respects: it established that the relationship between social and linguistic variables could be systematically studied, and put forward the construct of apparent time as a means of inferring diachronic change in progress based on synchronic patterns. By drawing on Labov's methods for a restudy of MV forty years later, we establish (i) the validity of apparent-time inferencing, and (ii) the robustness of social indexing for the (ay) and (aw) variables on MV. The results strengthen both methodological and theoretical principles that have become central to (socio)linguistics.}}

@article{Fleck:2007,
	Author = {Fleck, David W.},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:14:14 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {589--614},
	Title = {Evidentiality and Double Tense in {M}atses},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {The Matses language of the Panoan family, spoken in Amazonian Peru and Brazil, has one of the most intricate evidential systems ever described, requiring speakers to precisely and explicitly code their source of information every time they report a past event. In a typologically unique inflectional configuration that I call DOUBLE TENSE the speakers specify both (i) how long ago an inferred event happened and (ii) how long ago the evidence upon which the inference was made was encountered. This article explores in detail the Matses evidential system, focusing on several novel patterns relevant to the typological study of evidentiality and providing social and historical perspectives.}}

@article{Sankoff:2007,
	Author = {Sankoff, Gillian and Blondeau, H{\'e}l{\`e}ne},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:11:49 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {560--588},
	Title = {Language Change Across the Lifespan: /r/ in {M}ontreal {F}rench},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {We address the articulation between language change in the historical sense and language change as experienced by individual speakers through a trend and panel study of the change from apical to dorsal /r/ in Montreal French. The community as a whole rapidly advanced its use of dorsal [R]. Most individual speakers followed across time were stable after the critical period, with phonological patterns set by the end of adolescence. A sizeable minority, however, made substantial changes. The window of opportunity for linguistic modification in later life may be expanded with rapid change in progress when linguistic variables take on social significance.}}

@article{Geurts:2007,
	Author = {Geurts, Bart and Nouwen, Rick},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:09:48 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {533--559},
	Title = {\emph{At Least} et al.: The Semantics of Scalar Modifiers},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {On the naive account of scalar modifiers like more than and at least, At least three girls snored is synonymous with More than two girls snored, and both sentences mean that the number of snoring girls exceeded two (the same, mutatis mutandis, for sentences with at most and less/fewer than). We show that this is false and propose an alternative theory, according to which superlative modifiers (at least/most) are quite different from comparative ones (more/less/fewer than). Whereas the naive theory is basically right about comparative modifiers, it is wrong about superlative modifiers, which we claim have a MODAL meaning: an utterance of At least three girls snored conveys two things: first, that it is CERTAIN that there was a group ofthree snoring girls, and second, that more than four girls MAY have snored. We argue that this analysis explains various facts that are problematic for the naive view, which have to do with specificity, distributional differences between superlative and comparative modifiers, differential patterns of inference licensed by these expressions, and the way they interact with various operators, like modals and negation.}}

@article{Bohnemeyer:2007,
	Author = {Bohnemeyer, J{\"u}rgen and Enfield, Nicholas J. and Essegbey, James and Ebarretxe-Antu{\~n}ano, Iraide and Kita, Sotaro and L{\"u}pke, Friederike and Ameka, Felix K.},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:05:28 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {495--532},
	Title = {Principles of Event Segmentation in Language: The Case of Motion Events},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {We examine universals and crosslinguistic variation in constraints on event segmentation. Previous typological studies have focused on segmentation into syntactic (Pawley 1987) or intonational units (Giv{\'o}n 1991). We argue that the correlation between such units and semantic/conceptual event representations is language-specific. As an alternative, we introduce the MACRO-EVENT PROPERTY (MEP): a construction has the MEP if it packages event representations such that temporal operators necessarily have scope over all subevents. A case study on the segmentation of motion events into macro-event expressions in eighteen genetically and typologically diverse languages has produced evidence of two types of design principles that impact motion-event segmentation: language-specific lexicalization patterns and universal constraints on form-to-meaning mapping.}}

@book{Culicover:2005,
	Author = {Culicover, Peter W. and Jackendoff, Ray},
	Date-Added = {2007-12-30 08:46:49 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-12-30 08:48:21 -0500},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Simpler Syntax},
	Year = {2005}}

@article{Watanabe:1992,
	Author = {Watanabe, Akira},
	Date-Added = {2008-01-21 12:34:08 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-01-21 12:36:14 -0500},
	Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics},
	Pages = {255--291},
	Title = {Subjacency and {S}-structure movement of \emph{wh}-in-situ},
	Volume = {1},
	Year = {1992}}

@article{Broekhuis:2007,
	Author = {Broekhuis, Hans},
	Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:15:16 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {109--141},
	Title = {Object shift and subject shift},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Adopting the hypothesis that both NP-movement of subjects and
scrambling of objects are instances of A-movement, this article aims at
accounting for the similarities and differences between these movements within
the so-called derivation-and-evaluation framework, which combines certain
aspects from the minimalist program and optimality theory.}}

@article{Ackema:2007,
	Author = {Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad},
	Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:13:46 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {81--107},
	Title = {Restricted pro drop in {E}arly {M}odern {D}utch},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {In this paper, we argue that Early Modern Dutch allowed pro
drop, despite the fact that the language has only poor agreement. This
provides a direct counterexample to the standard view that Italian-style pro drop
is subject to a condition of grammatical recoverability (in that the features of pro
must be indexed on the verb). However, pro drop in Early Modern Dutch is
subject to very strict pragmatic conditions, and this, we argue, does follow from
the lack of rich agreement. Basing ourselves on Mira Ariel's Accessibility
Theory, we argue that if fewer features of an omitted subject are grammatically
recoverable, its antecedent must be more salient in discourse. Consequently,
there is an indirect relation between rich agreement and pro drop: rich agreement
facilitates pro drop in more contexts. Since a very limited distribution of
pro drop implies that the rule is vulnerable in diachronic development, the
familiar cross-linguistic generalization can be derived.}}

@article{Wiklund:2007,
	Author = {Wiklund, Anna-Lena and Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn and Bentzen, Kristine and Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir, Thorbj{\"o}rg},
	Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:09:42 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {203--233},
	Title = {Rethinking {S}candinavian verb movement},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This paper reconsiders the distribution of verb movement in Scandinavian
in light of new data from Norwegian and Icelandic. The main claim is that Regional
Northern Norwegian displays optional verb movement to the inflectional domain,
whereas Icelandic has no independent verb movement at all to this domain, contrary
to standard assumptions: All verb movement in Icelandic is to the CP domain of the
clause. A remnant movement approach to verb movement is explored and it is
proposed that movement to the CP domain and movement corresponding to V-to-I
movement differ in amount of material pied-piped. The analysis presented captures
the observed differences between the two movements.}}

@article{Lodrup:2007,
	Author = {L{\o}drup, Helge},
	Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:06:20 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {183--201},
	Title = {A new account of simple and complex reflexives in {N}orwegian},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article argues that the complex reflexive in Norwegian has a wider
distribution than is usually assumed in the literature (for example, Hellan 1988).
Both simple and complex reflexives are used in the local domain, which must be
defined as the minimal clause. The simple reflexive is used when the physical aspect
of the referent of the binder is in focus. It is seen as an inalienable denoting the body
of the referent of the binder. Its distribution follows an independently established
binding principle for inalienables, while the complex reflexive is an elsewhere form.}}

@article{Hoeksema:2007,
	Author = {Hoeksema, Jack},
	Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:04:10 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {163--182},
	Title = {Parasitic licensing of negative polarity items},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This paper proposes a new treatment of parasitically licensed negative
polarity items, based on the idea that indefinite negative polarity items may
optionally incorporate a negative feature from their licenser, and thus acquire the
necessary features to in turn license a negative polarity item. The process of negative
incorporation is that of Klima (Negation in English. In J.A. Fodor and J.J. Katz
(Eds.), The Structure of Language. Readings in the Philosophy of Language,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp. 246-323, 1964), but now viewed as a
potentially covert operation and offers an alternative to den Dikken's (J. Comp.
Germ. Linguist., 5:35-66, 2002) seminal account of parasitic licensing. Some
advantages of the covert incorporation proposal are sketched, including two
applications outside the area of polarity licensing: adverbial modification by
approximative adverbs, and emphatic reduplication.}}

@book{Safir:2004,
	Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts},
	Author = {Safir, Ken},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-29 17:20:23 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-29 17:22:00 -0500},
	Publisher = {MIT Press},
	Title = {The {S}yntax of {(In)}dependence},
	Year = {2004}}

@book{Gartner:2007,
	Address = {Berlin},
	Author = {G{\"a}rtner, Hans-Martin},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-29 13:41:50 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-29 13:42:48 -0500},
	Publisher = {Akademie-Verlag},
	Title = {Generalized Transformations and Beyond},
	Year = {forthcoming}}

@techreport{Sternefeld:2000,
	Author = {Sternefeld, Wolfgang},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-28 08:32:01 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-28 08:33:51 -0500},
	Institution = {Universit{\"a}t T{\"u}bingen},
	Number = {02--00},
	Title = {Semantic vs. Syntactic Reconstruction},
	Type = {SfS-Report},
	Year = {2000}}

@article{Hay:2007,
	Author = {Hay, Jennifer and Bauer, Laurie},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:15:40 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {388--400},
	Title = {Phoneme inventory and population size},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This short report investigates the relationship between population size and phoneme inventory size, and finds a surprisingly robust correlation between the two. The more speakers a language has, the bigger its phoneme inventory is likely to be. We show that this holds for both vowel inventories and consonant inventories. It is not an artifact of language family.}}

@article{Labov:2007,
	Author = {Labov, William},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:13:46 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {344--387},
	Title = {Transmission and Diffusion},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = { The transmission of linguistic change within a speech community is characterized by incrementation within a faithfully reproduced pattern characteristic of the family tree model, while diffusion across communities shows weakening of the original pattern and a loss of structural features. It is proposed that this is the result of the difference between the learning abilities of children and adults. Evidence is drawn from two studies of geographic diffusion. (i) Structural constraints are lost in the diffusion of the New York City pattern of tensing short-a to four other communities: northern New Jersey, Albany, Cincinnati, and New Orleans. (ii) The spread of the Northern Cities Shift from Chicago to St. Louis is found to represent the borrowing of individual sound changes, rather than the diffusion of the structural pattern as a whole. 

}}

@article{Birner:2007,
	Author = {Birner, Betty J. and Kaplan, Jeffrey P. and Ward, Gregory},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:11:57 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {317--343},
	Title = {Functional Compositionality and the Interaction of Discourse Constraints},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {We argue for the existence of functionally complex constructions whose elements compositionally impose discourse-functional constraints on the use of the whole. In particular, we examine th-clefts (as in That's John who wrote the book), equatives with epistemic would and demonstrative subjects (as in That would be John), and simple equatives with demonstrative subjects (as in That's John). We show that, contra previous approaches, the latter two constructions need not be analyzed as truncated clefts. Rather, the properties that these constructions share with th-clefts can be straightforwardly accounted for as the sum of the constraints on their shared elements---that is, the equative construction, the demonstrative subject, and the presence of a contextually salient open proposition. The convergence of these elemental properties in each of these three constructions results in the possibility of the demonstrative being used to refer to the instantiation of the variable in the open proposition, which in turn predicts a complex of distributional behaviors shared by precisely the constructions that share these properties. Because these distributional behaviors can be straightforwardly explained in terms of this functional compositionality, the motivation for a truncated-cleft analysis disappears. These results support the view that not all functional properties must be learned on a construction-by-construction basis; instead, the discourse functions of an utterance are built up compositionally from those of its parts.}}

@article{Zuraw:2007,
	Author = {Zuraw, Kie},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:09:52 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {277--316},
	Title = {The Role of Phonetic Knowledge in Phonological Patterning: Corpus and Survey Evidence from {T}agalog Infixation},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {A current controversy in phonological theory concerns the explanation of crosslinguistic tendencies. It is often assumed that crosslinguistic tendencies are explained by mental bias: a pattern is common because it is favored by learners/speakers. But work by Blevins and colleagues in EVOLUTIONARY PHONOLOGY has argued that many crosslinguistic tendencies can be explained without positing such bias. This would mean that crosslinguistic tendencies cannot be unproblematically used as evidence about the mental machinery that humans bring to learning and using language. In response, many researchers have looked at different types of data, such as processing, learning of real and artificial languages, and literary invention. This article presents another type of data: extension of native-language phonology to words with novel phonological structure, in this case infixation in Tagalog into loanwords with novel initial consonant clusters. The data come from a written corpus and a survey. Tagalog speakers' treatment of these clusters parallels Fleischhacker's crosslinguistic findings of cluster splittability. This article argues that explaining the data requires attributing to Tagalog speakers phonetic knowledge and a bias about how to apply that knowledge.}}

@article{Beaver:2007,
	Author = {Beaver, David and Clark, Brady Zack and Flemming, Edward and Jaeger, T. Florian and Wolters, Maria},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:06:57 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {245--276},
	Title = {When Semantics Meets Phonetics: Acoustical Studies of Second-Occurrence Focus},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {A second-occurrence (SO) focus is the semantic focus of a focus-sensitive operator (e.g. only), but is a repeat of anearlier focused occurrence. We report onthe first systematic productionan d perception experiments to show that SO foci occurring after a nuclear accent are, as Rooth (1996b) has claimed, prosodically marked. We find that (i) there is no mean pitch rise on SO foci, (ii) SO foci are marked by longer duration and greater energy, and (iii) listeners are able to detect the difference between SO foci and nonfoci. On the basis of these results, we argue that SO focus is compatible with theories of focus interpretationthat it has beenclaimed to contradict.}}

@article{Friedmann:2007,
	Author = {Friedmann, Na'ama},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:00:55 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-19 09:02:17 -0500},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {377--422},
	Title = {Young Children and {A}-chains: The Acquisition of {H}ebrew {U}naccusatives},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Pouscoulous:2007,
	Author = {Pouscoulous, Nausicaa and Noveck, Ira and Politzer, Guy and Bastide, Anne},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-19 08:59:08 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-19 09:00:15 -0500},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {347--375},
	Title = {A Developmental Investigation of Processing Costs in Implicature Production},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Hernandez:2007,
	Author = {Hern{\'a}ndez, Ana Carrera},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-16 10:06:05 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Lingua},
	Number = {12},
	Pages = {2106--2133},
	Title = {Gapping as a syntactic dependency},
	Volume = {117},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Boersma:2007,
	Author = {Boersma, Paul},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-16 09:57:57 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Lingua},
	Number = {12},
	Pages = {1989--2054},
	Title = {Some listerner-oriented accounts of h-aspir{\'e} in {F}rench},
	Volume = {117},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article shows that the usual speaker-based account of h-aspire in French can explain at most three of the 
four phonological processes in which it is involved, whereas a listener-oriented account can explain all of them. 
On a descriptive level, the behaviour of h-aspire is accounted for with a grammar model that involves a control 
loop, whose crucial ingredient is listener-oriented faithfulness constraints. These constraints evaluate 
phonological recoverability, which is the extent to which the speaker thinks the listener will be able to 
recover the phonological message. On a more reductionist level, however, the pronunciation of h-aspire and its 
variation is accounted for with a new, very simple, grammar model for bidirectional phonology and phonetics, 
which uses a single constraint set for the four processes of perception, recognition, phonological production, 
and phonetic implementation, and in which phonological and phonetic production are evaluated in parallel. In 
this model, the phenomenon of phonological recoverability is not built in, as in control-loop grammars, but 
emerges from the interaction of four equally simple learning algorithms.}}

@article{Legate:2007,
	Author = {Legate, Julie Anne and Yang, Charles},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-05 09:37:22 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-05 09:38:09 -0500},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {315--344},
	Title = {Morphosyntactic Learning and the Development of Tense},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Green:2007,
	Author = {Green, Lisa and Roeper, Thomas},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-05 09:32:05 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-05 09:33:05 -0500},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {269--313},
	Title = {The Acquisition Path for Tense-Aspect: Remote Past and Habitual in Child {A}frican {A}merican {E}nglish},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article considers the comprehension of tense-aspect markers remote base BIN and habitual \emph{be} by 3- to 5-year old developing African American English (AAE)-speaking children and their Southwest Louisiana Vernacular English (SwLVE)-speaking peers. Overall both groups of children associated BIN with the distant past; however, the AAE-speaking children were twice as likely to give a distant past response on the ``BIN went'' task. These results are discussed in terms of event realization, the Aspect Hypothesis, and feature agreement. We delineate a path that uses the lexical part ofthe Aspect Hypothesis, teh role of sematnics in defining the end stat of a refined aspectual system, and an interface bweteen syntax and semantics to explain subtel steps involving agreement in the acquisition process. Teh AAE-speaking children scored significantly higher on the habitual \emph{be} tasks than the SwLVE-speaking children, whose scores were not significantly different from chance. The results suggest that the AAE-speaking children have developing native knowledge of habitual `be' and are beginning to associate it with eventualities that recur.}}

@article{Hyams:2007,
	Author = {Hyams, Nina},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-05 09:27:54 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-05 09:28:52 -0500},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {231--268},
	Title = {Aspectual Effects on Interpretation in Early Grammar},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This paper focuses on the temporal and modal meanings associated with root infinitives (RIs) and other non-finite clauses in several typologically diverse languages --- English, Russian, Greek and Dutch. I discuss the role that event structure, aspect and modality play in the interpretation of these clauses. The basic hypothesis is that in the absence of a tense specificaiton, the temporal reference of non-finite clauses is determined by the event structure of the predicate, in particular by the property of event closure. General principles of aspectual interpretation, such as the Puctuality Constraint (Giorgi and Pianesi 1997) and the Default Anchoring Requirement (a special case of a broader requirement that all clauses be temporally interpreted) interact with the particular aspectual features of hte target langauge to explain the cross-linguistic differences in the temporal interpretation (past/present/modal) non-finite clauses.}}

@article{Pires:2007,
	Author = {Pires, Acrisio},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-05 07:49:10 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {165--203},
	Title = {The Derivation of Clausal Gerunds},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = { This paper investigates the syntax of clausal gerunds---a class of gerunds that 
can have either a null subject or an overt DP Case-marked with accusative or 
nominative. First, it addresses the difficulty of accounting for gerunds that allow both 
null and overt subjects in principles and parameters/minimalist approaches to Case and 
control. Second, the paper explores the existence of a common structure for the two 
clausal gerunds, supported by the absence of empirical distinctions in their feature 
specification, especially regarding tense. Third, the paper introduces new observations 
about the distribution of clausal gerunds and argues that the complex alternations and 
restrictions on their distribution results from the interaction between Case and 
Agreement valuation, the limited possibility of A-movement out of a clausal gerund, 
and convergence considerations resulting from the existence of distinct numerations}}

@article{Boeckx:2007,
	Author = {Boeckx, Cedric and Grohmann, Kleanthes K.},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-05 07:46:20 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {204--222},
	Title = {Remark: Putting Phases in Perspective},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Landau:2007,
	Author = {Landau, Idan},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 17:16:25 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Syntax},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {127--164},
	Title = {Constraints on Partial {VP}-Fronting},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Partial VP-fronting, in which a verb is fronted with one argument, stranding
the other one, is subject to a curious restriction in both Hebrew and English: The fronted
VP-portion must be a potential independent VP in the language. It is shown that both
incremental merger and remnant VP-fronting cannot explain the restriction, whereas an
analysis incorporating late adjunction of the stranded argument can. Late adjunction,
in turn, cannot apply too deeply, which explains why the same set of environments
inaccessible to partial VP-fronting force adjunct reconstruction. The analysis implies
that not only Spell-Out, but also interpretive constraints, like the Theta-Criterion, apply at the
phase level. Furthermore, Condition A is shown to be another such constraint.}}

@article{Kallulli:2007,
	Author = {Kallulli, Dalina},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:53:10 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:54:12 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {770--780},
	Title = {Rethinking the Passive/Anticausative Distinction},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Gouskova:2007,
	Author = {Gouskova, Maria},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:52:08 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:53:07 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {759--770},
	Title = {Dep: Beyond Epenthesis},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Flack:2007,
	Author = {Flack, Kathryn},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:50:24 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:51:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {749--758},
	Title = {Templatic Morphology and Indexed Markedness Constraints},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Zonneveld:2007,
	Author = {Zonneveld, Wim},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:46:31 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:47:10 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {737--748},
	Title = {Dutch 2nd Singular Prosodic Weakening: Two Rejoinders},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article examines the arguments for, and rejects, the proposal by Ackema and Neeleman (2003) that the behavior of the Dutch 2nd person singular pronoun `jij' in inverted structures should be explained as morphosyntactic allomorphy, conditioned by ``initial'' prosodic phrasing prior to Spell-Out. First, by neutralizing (under inversion) the distinction between 2sg and 1sg present tense verb forms, the proposal makes an incorrect prediction for a well-known class of ``strong'' verbs. Second, ``initial'' prosody does not appear to condition the process. Benmamoun and Lorimer's (2006) ``overapplication'' data for this phenomenon are shown to result from an incorrect interpretation of ``d-weakening'' verbs.}}

@article{Mascaro:2007,
	Author = {Mascar{\'o}, Joan},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:43:20 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:44:01 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {715--735},
	Title = {External Allomorphy and Lexical Representation},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Many cases of allomorphic alternation are restricted to specific lexical items but at the same time show a regular phonological distribution. Standard approaches cannot deal with these cases because they must either resort to diacritic features or list regular phonological contexts as idiosyncratic. These problems can be overcome if we assume that allomorphs are lexically organized as a partially ordered set. If no ordering is established, allomorphic choice is determined by the phonology --- in particular, by the emergence of the unmarked (TETU). In other cases, TETU effects are insufficient, and lexical ordering determines the preference for dominant allomorphs.}}

@article{Neeleman:2007,
	Author = {Neeleman, Ad and Kriszta Szendroi},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:38:59 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:43:02 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {671--714},
	Title = {Radical Pro Drop and the Morphology of Pronouns},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {We propose a new generalization governing the crosslinguistic distribution of radical pro drop (the type of pro drop found in Chinese). It occurs only in langauges whose pronouns are agglutinating for case, number, or some other nominal feature. Other types of languages cannot omit pronouns freely, althought they may have agreement-based pro drop. This generalization can for the most part be derived from three assumptions. (a) Spell-out rules for pronouns may target nonterminal categories. (b) Pro drop is zero spell-out (i.e., deletion) of regular pronouns. (c) Competition between spell-out rules is governed by the Elsewhere Principle. A full derivaiton relies on an acquisitional strategy motivated by the absence of negative evidence. We test our proposal using data from a sample of twenty langauges and ``The World Atlas of Language Structures'' (Haspelmath et al. 2005).}}

@article{Miyagawa:2007,
	Author = {Miyagawa, Shigeru and Koji Arikawa},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:35:08 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:36:14 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {645--670},
	Title = {Locality in Syntax and Floating Numeral Quantifiers},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {We defend the idea that a floating quantifier observes syntactic locality with its associated noun phrase. This idea has given rise to a number of important empirical insights, including the VP-internal subject position, intermediate traces, and NP-traces. Recently, this syntactic locality of floating quantifiers has been questioned in a number of languages. We take up evidence from Japanese that purports to disprove the locality requirements on floating numeral quantifiers and their associated NP, and we demonstrate that the arguments in fact give evidence for syntactic locality, not against it. Our conclusions suggest that evidence agaist the locality of floating quantifiers given in other langauges should be reexamined.}}

@article{Boskovic:2007,
	Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko},
	Date-Added = {2007-11-02 09:25:08 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 09:34:35 -0400},
	Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {589--644},
	Title = {On the Locality and Motivation of {M}ove and {A}gree: An Even More Minimal Theory},
	Volume = {38},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {The article proposes a new thoery of successive-cyclic movement that reconciles the early and current minimalist approaches to it. As in the early approach, there is not feature checking in intermediate positions of successive-cyclic movement. However, as in the current approach and unlike in early minimalism, successive-cyclic movement starts before teh final target of movement enters the structure, and Form Chain is eliminated. The locality of Move and the locality of Agree are shown to be radically different, Agree being free from several mechanisms that constrain Move, namely, phases and the Activation Condition. However, there is no need to take phases to define locality domains of syntax or to posit the Activation Condition as an independent principle. They still hold empirically for Move as theorems. The Generalized EPP (the "I need a Spec" property of attracting heads) and the Inverse Case Filter are also dispensable. The traditional Case Filter, stated as a checking requirement, is the sole driving force of A-movement. More generally, Move is always driven by a formal inadequacy (an uninterpretable feature) of the moving element, while Agree is target driven. The system resolves a lookahead problem that arises under the EPP-driven movement approach, where the EPP diacritic indicating that X moves is placed on Y, not X, although X often needs to start moving before Y enters the structure.}}

@unpublished{Merchant:2007,
	Author = {Merchant, Jason},
	Date-Added = {2007-10-24 09:59:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-10-24 10:00:36 -0400},
	Month = {February},
	Note = {Unpublished manuscript, University of Chicago},
	Title = {Voice and Ellipsis},
	Year = {2007}}

@unpublished{Vries:2007,
	Author = {de Vries, Mark},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-20 15:20:46 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-20 15:21:53 -0400},
	Note = {unpublished manuscript, University of Groningen},
	Title = {Internal and External Remerge: On Movement, Multidominance, and the Linearization of Syntactic Objects},
	Year = {2007}}

@phdthesis{Blevins:1990,
	Author = {Blevins, James},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-20 15:13:38 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-20 15:14:39 -0400},
	School = {University of Massachusetts at Amherst},
	Title = {Syntactic Complexity: Evidence for Discontinuity and Multidomination},
	Year = {1990}}

@incollection{Kuwabara:1997,
	Address = {Chiba},
	Author = {Kuwabara, Kazuki},
	Booktitle = {Researching and Verifying an Advanced Theory of Human Language},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-18 20:20:14 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-18 20:21:49 -0400},
	Editor = {Inoue, Kazuo},
	Pages = {61--84},
	Publisher = {Kanda University of International Studies},
	Title = {On the Properties of Truncated Clauses in {J}apanese},
	Year = {1997}}

@unpublished{Kratzer:2006,
	Author = {Kratzer, Angelika},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-18 19:23:39 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-18 19:24:40 -0400},
	Month = {July},
	Note = {talk given at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem},
	Title = {Decomposing Attitude Verbs},
	Year = {2006}}

@inproceedings{Nerbonne:1990,
	Author = {Nerbonne, John and Iida, Masayo and Ladusaw, William},
	Booktitle = {The Proceedings of the Ninth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-12 07:12:15 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-12 07:14:34 -0400},
	Editor = {Halpern, Aaron L.},
	Pages = {379--394},
	Title = {Semantics of Common {N}oun {P}hrase Anaphora},
	Year = {1990}}

@unpublished{Taraldsen:1978a,
	Author = {Taraldsen, Knut Tarald},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-10 22:20:52 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-10 22:21:47 -0400},
	Note = {unpublished paper, {MIT}},
	Title = {On the {NIC}, vacuous application and the that-trace filter},
	Year = {1978}}

@article{Hockett:1952,
	Author = {Hockett, Charles F.},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-10 09:55:38 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-10 09:56:30 -0400},
	Journal = {Studies in Linguistics},
	Pages = {27--39},
	Title = {A formal statement of morphemic analysis},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {1952}}

@book{Harris:1951,
	Author = {Harris, Zellig},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-10 09:53:38 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-10 09:54:29 -0400},
	Publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
	Title = {Methods in Structural Linguistics},
	Year = {1951}}

@inproceedings{Perlmutter:1978,
	Author = {Perlmutter, David},
	Booktitle = {Berkeley Linguistic Society},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-03 14:41:13 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-03 14:42:51 -0400},
	Organization = {University of California, Berkeley},
	Pages = {157--189},
	Title = {Impersonal Passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis},
	Volume = {{IV}},
	Year = {1978}}

@book{Pires:2006,
	Address = {Amsterdam/Philadelphia},
	Author = {Pires, Acrisio},
	Date-Added = {2007-09-03 12:23:03 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-09-03 12:24:23 -0400},
	Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company},
	Title = {The {M}inimalist Syntax of {D}efective {D}omains},
	Year = {2006}}

@incollection{Bobaljik:2003,
	Author = {Bobaljik, Jonathan},
	Booktitle = {The Second {Glot} {I}nternational State-of-the-Article Book},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Cheng, Lisa L.-S. and Sybesma, Rint},
	Pages = {107--148},
	Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter},
	Title = {Floating Quantifiers: Handle with care},
	Year = {2003}}

@article{Blom:2007,
	Author = {Blom, Elma},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {75--113},
	Title = {Modality, Infinitives, and Finite Bare Verbs in {D}utch and {E}nglish Language},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article focuses on the meaning of nonfinite clauses (``root infinitives'') in Dutch and English child language. I present experimental and naturalistic data confirming the claim that Dutch root infinitives are more often modal than English root infinitives. This cross-linguistic difference is significatly smaller than previously assumed, however. Explaining the observations, I assume that morphology operates separately from syntax and semantics (Beard (1982; 1995)) and rely on teh notion of underspecification (Halle and Marantz (1993), Harley and Noyer (1999)). It is argued that the Dutch infinitival verb and the English bare verb are both underspecified vocabulary items that can be inserted in various syntactic contexts. Syntactic difference between Dutch and English result in the includion of tensed root infinitives in English, whereas Dutch root infinitives are limited to untensed clauses. This proposal accounts for cross-linguistic differences in the meaning of root infinitives, cross-linguistic differences in type of verbal predicate, variability in the meaning of root infinitives, and patterns in subject selection.}}

@article{Bohnacker:2007,
	Author = {Bohnacker, Ute},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {31--73},
	Title = {On the ``Vulnerability'' of Syntactic Domains in {S}wedish and {G}erman},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article investigates the L2 acquisition of clausal syntax in postpuberty learners of German and Swedish regarding V2, VP headedness, and verb particle constructions. The learner data are tested against L2 theories according to which lower structural projections (VP) are acquired before higher functional projections (IP, CP), VP syntax is unproblematic (`invulnerable'), but where grammatical operations related tot he topmost level of syntactic structure (CP) are acquired late (e.g., Platzacks' (2001) `vulnerable C-domain'). It is shown that such theories do not hold water: Native speakers of Swedish learning German and native speakers of German learning Swedish both master V2 from early on. At the same time, these learners exhibit a nontargetlike syntax at lower structural levels: residual VO int eh case of hte swedish-L2 learners of German, and persistent nontarget transitive verb particle constructions in the German-L1 learners of Swedish. I argue that these findings are best explained by assuming full transfer of L1 syntax (e.g., Schwart an Sprouse (1996)).}}

@article{Matsuo:2007,
	Author = {Matsuo, Ayumi},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {3--29},
	Title = {Differing Interpretations of Empty Categories in {E}nglish and {J}apanese {VP} Ellipsis Contexts},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Schneider-Zioga:2007,
	Author = {Schneider-Zioga, Patricia},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {403--446},
	Title = {Anti-agreement, anti-locality and Minimality},
	Volume = {25},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {Anti-agreement is the phenomenon whereby the morphosyntactic form of
subject/verb agreement is sensitive to whether or not an agreeing subject has been
locally extracted. This paper argues that, together with an anti-locality constraint on
movement (Grohmann, 2003) which prohibits overly local movement as elaborated
in (i--v), the occurrence of a canonically left dislocated subject in anti-agreement languages
accounts for all syntax peculiar to the phenomenon in the Bantu language of
Kinande: (i) subjects can extract long-distance even across islands; (ii) subjects are
locally unextractable if the canonical subject/verb agreement occurs; (iii) local subject
extraction requires a change in subject/verb agreement morphology; (iv) objects
cannot locally extract even if they appear to do so; and (v) objects can extract longdistance;
however, they are sensitive to islands. Evidence comes from an analysis of
the distribution of nominal expressions in the language as well as in-depth examination
of two different wh-question formation strategies in the language. This study also
reveals that the last resort strategy in a language is relativized to what is first resort: if
resumption is first resort, movement is last resort, and vice versa.}}

@article{Ormazabal:2007,
	Author = {Ormazabal, Javier and Romero, Juan},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {315--347},
	Title = {The Object Areement Constraint},
	Volume = {25},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This paper deals with the so-called Person Case Constraint (Bonet, 1991),
a universal constraint blocking accusative clitics and object agreement morphemes
other than third person when a dative is inserted in the same clitic/agreement cluster.
The aim of this paper is twofold. First, we argue that the scope of the PCC is considerably
broader than assumed in previous work, and that neither its formulation in terms
of person (1st/2nd vs. 3rd)-case (accusative vs. dative) restrictions nor its morphological
nature are part of the right descriptive generalization.We present evidence (i) that
the PCC is triggered by the presence of an animacy feature in the object's agreement
set; (ii) that it is not case dependent, also showing up in languages that lack dative case;
and (iii) that it is not morphologically bound. Second, we argue that the PCC, even if
it is modified accordingly, still puts together two different properties of the agreement
system that should be set apart: (i) a cross-linguistic sensitivity of object agreement
to animacy and (ii) a similarly widespread restriction on multiple object agreement
observed crosslinguistically. These properties lead us to propose a new generalization,
the Object Agreement Constraint (OAC): if the verbal complex encodes object
agreement, no other argument can be licensed through verbal agreement.}}

@article{Nevins:2007,
	Author = {Nevins, Andrew},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {273--313},
	Title = {The Representation of Third Person and it Consequences for Person-Case Effects},
	Volume = {25},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {In modeling the effects of the Person-Case Constraint (PCC), a common
claim is that 3rd person ``is not a person''. However, while this claim does work in
the syntax, it creates problems in the morphology. For example, characterizing the
well-known ``spurious se effect'' in Spanish simply cannot be done without reference
to 3rd person. Inspired by alternatives to underspecification that have emerged in
phonology (e.g., Calabrese, 1995), a revised featural system is proposed, whereby
syntactic agreement may be relativized to certain values of a feature, in particular,
the contrastive and marked values. The range of variation in PCC effects is shown
to emerge as a consequence of the parametric options allowed on a Probing head,
whereas the representation of person remains constant across modules of the grammar
and across languages.}}

@article{Gutierrez-Bravo:2007,
	Author = {Guti{\`e}rrez-Bravo, Rodrigo},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {235--271},
	Title = {Prominence Scales and Unmarked Word Order in {S}panish},
	Volume = {25},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This paper deals with a number of facts related to the word order of Spanish
declarative clauses and develops an analysis where the unmarked word order of
Spanish clauses with different classes of verbs is not determined by syntactic conditions
such as Case or agreement, but rather by structural conditions that are closely
related to the thematic role of the different arguments of the verb. The analysis is
based on a set of data that point to the conclusion that even though unmarked word
order in Spanish is not determined by Case or agreement considerations, it is still
mostly regulated by the EPP. However, these same data indicate that (a) the EPP
is a requirement operative in some constructions but not in others, and (b) phrases
other than the subject DP can satisfy the EPP. This paper develops an Optimality
Theoretic account of these facts where the core of the analysis consists of introducing
the notion of the Pole of the clause, defined as the highest specifier of the inflectional
layer, and developing a set of markedness constraints whose interaction determines
when and whether this specifier position is occupied. Central to this analysis are the
characterization of the EPP as a violable constraint that requires the Pole specifier to
be filled, and the use of Harmonic Alignment to formalize a hierarchy of markedness
constraints that target the relative markedness of an argument or adjunct when it
occupies the Pole specifier, independently of the grammatical relation it bears.}}

@incollection{Klima:1964,
	Author = {Klima, Edward S.},
	Booktitle = {The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy of Language},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Fodor, Jerry A. and Katz, Jerrold J.},
	Pages = {246--323},
	Publisher = {Prentice Hall},
	Title = {Negation in {E}nglish},
	Year = {1964}}

@incollection{Langacker:1969,
	Author = {Langacker, Ronald W.},
	Booktitle = {Modern Studies in {E}nglish},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Reibel, David A. and Schane, Sandford A.},
	Pages = {160--186},
	Publisher = {Prentice Hall},
	Title = {On Pronominalization and the Chain of Command},
	Year = {1969}}

@article{McCawley:1968a,
	Author = {McCawley, James D.},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {286--299},
	Title = {English as a {VSO} Language},
	Volume = {46},
	Year = {1970}}

@incollection{Fukui:1986a,
	Author = {Fukui, Naoki and Speas, Margaret},
	Booktitle = {{MIT} Working Papers in Linguistics},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Fukui, Naoki and Rapoport, Tova R. and Sagey, Elizabeth},
	Pages = {128--172},
	Publisher = {Department of Linguistics and Philosophy},
	Title = {Specifiers and Projection},
	Volume = {8},
	Year = {1986}}

@article{Lasnik:1977,
	Author = {Lasnik, Howard and Kupin, J.},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Theoretical Linguistics},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {173--196},
	Title = {A Restrictive Theory of Transformational Grammar},
	Volume = {4},
	Year = {1977}}

@incollection{Chomsky:1970,
	Address = {Waltham, Massachusetts},
	Author = {Chomsky, Noam},
	Booktitle = {Readings in {E}nglish Transformational Grammar},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Jacobs, J. and P. Rosenbaum},
	Pages = {184--221},
	Publisher = {Ginn},
	Title = {Remarks on Nominalization},
	Year = {1970}}

@article{Ladfoged:2007,
	Author = {Ladfoged, Peter},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {161--180},
	Title = {Articulatory Features for Describing Lexical Distinctions},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {The sounds that distinguish words in the world's languages can be described in terms of properties that are often called (distinctive) features. The best-known attempts to describe sounds in this way are the acoustic features of Jakobson, Fant, and Halle (1952) and the innate cognitive abilities described by the feature theory of Chomsky and Halle (1968). This article provides a more comprehensive answer to the problem of specifying contrasting segments, but one that still leaves some questions open. It also considers the constraints on possible combinations of features, using a development of the notion of a feature hierarchy suggested by Clements (1985)}}

@article{Alexopoulou:2007,
	Author = {Alexopoulou, Theodora and Keller, Frank},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {110--160},
	Title = {Locality, Cyclicity, and Resumption: At the Interface between the Grammar and Human Sentence Processor},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = { We present an experimental investigation of the role of resumptive pronouns. We investigate object extraction in WH-questions for a range of syntactic configurations (nonislands, weak islands, strong islands) and for multiple levels of embedding (single, double, and triple). In order to establish the crosslinguistic properties of resumption, parallel experiments were conducted in three languages, viz. English, Greek, and German. Three main experimental results are reported. First, resumption does not remedy island violations: resumptive pronominals are at most as acceptable as gaps, but not more acceptable. This result disconfirms claims in the literature that resumptives can `save' island violations. Second, embedding reduces acceptability even in extraction out of nonislands and declaratives, structures standardly assumed to be fully grammatical. Third, nonislands and weak islands pattern together and contrast with strong islands in terms of the effect of resumption and embedding. Our experimental findings show a remarkable consistency across the three languages we investigate; crosslinguistic variation appears confined to quantitative differences in crosslinguistically identical principles. We argue that these experimental results can be explained by the interaction of grammatical principles with resource limitations of the human parser. In particular, extraction from nonislands and weak islands imposes increased demands on the computational resources of the parser. We extend Gibson's (1998) syntactic prediction locality theory in order to formalize this intuition and account for the processing complexity of A-bar dependencies.

}}

@article{Jager:2007,
	Author = {J{\"a}ger, Gerhard},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {74--109},
	Title = {Evolutionary Game Theory and Typology: A Case Study},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article deals with the typology of the case marking of semantic core roles. The competing economy considerations of hearer (disambiguation) and speaker (minimal effort) are formalized in terms of EVOLUTIONARY GAME THEORY. It is shown that the case-marking patterns that are attested in the languages of the world are those that are evolutionarily stable for different relative weightings of speaker economy and hearer economy, given the statistical patterns of language use that were extracted from corpora of naturally occurring conversations.}}

@article{Bickel:2007,
	Author = {Bickel, Balthasar and Banjade, Goma and Gaenszle, Martin and Lieven, Elena and Paudyal, Netra Prasad and Rai, Ichchha Purna and Rai, Manoj and Rai, Novel Kishore and Stoll, Sabine},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {43--73},
	Title = {Free Prefix Ordering in {C}hintang},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {This article demonstrates prefix permutability in Chintang (Sino-Tibetan, Nepal) that is not constrained by any semantic or morphosyntactic structure, or by any dialect, sociolect, or idiolect choice---a phenomenon ruled out by standard assumptions about grammatical words. The prefixes are fully fledged parts of grammatical words and are different from clitics on a large number of standard criteria. The analysis of phonological word domains suggests that prefix permutability is a side-effect of prosodic subcategorization: prefixes occur in variable orders because each prefix and each stem element project a phonological word of their own, and each such word can host a prefix, at any position.}}

@article{Corbett:2007,
	Author = {Corbett, Greville G.},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {Language},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {8--42},
	Title = {Canonical Typology, Suppletion, and Possible Words},
	Volume = {83},
	Year = {2007},
	Abstract = {I specify a typology for the extreme of inflectional morphology, namely suppletion (as in go ~ went). This is an unusual enterprise within typology, and it requires a `canonical' approach. That is, I define the canonical or best instance, through a set of converging criteria, and use this point in theoretical space to locate the various occurring types. Thus the criteria establish the dimensions along which specific instances of suppletion are found, allowing me to calibrate examples out from the canonical. The criteria fall into two main areas, those internal to the lexeme and those external to it. Moreover, I find interactions with other morphological phenomena and discuss four of them: syncretism, periphrasis, overdifferentiation, and reduplication. These remarkable instances of suppletion, particularly when in interaction with other phenomena, extend the boundary of the notion `possible word'. Besides laying out the possibilities for the specific phenomenon of suppletion, I show how a canonical approach allows progress in typology, even in the most challenging areas.}}

@article{Anderson:2007,
	Author = {Anderson, Bruce},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Keywords = {library},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {165--214},
	Title = {Learnability and Parametric Change in the Nominal System of {L2} {F}rench},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Barlow:2007,
	Author = {Barlow, Jessica A.},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {Language Acquisition},
	Keywords = {library},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {121--164},
	Title = {Grandfather Effects: A Longitudinal Case Study of the Phonological Acquisition of Intervocalic Consonants in {E}nglish},
	Volume = {14},
	Year = {2007}}

@inproceedings{Nevins:2003,
	Address = {Somerville, Massachusetts},
	Author = {Nevins, Andrew and Pranav Anand},
	Booktitle = {Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 22},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Tsujimura, M.},
	Pages = {370--383},
	Publisher = {Cascadilla Press},
	Title = {Some {AGREE}ment Matters},
	Year = {2003}}

@article{Tanaka:2007,
	Author = {Tanaka, Tomoyuki},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {25--67},
	Title = {The rise of lexical subjects in {E}nglish infinitives},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007}}

@article{Bouma:2007,
	Author = {Bouma, Gosse and Hendricks, Petra and Hoeksema, Jack},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2008-07-19 21:08:45 -0400},
	Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {1--24},
	Title = {Focus Particles Inside {P}repositional {P}hrases: A Comparison of {D}utch, {E}nglish, and {G}erman},
	Volume = {10},
	Year = {2007}}

@book{Johannessen:1998,
	Author = {Johannessen, Janne Bondi},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
	Title = {Coordination},
	Year = {1998}}

@article{Derbyshire:1981,
	Author = {Derbyshire, Desmond C. and Pullum, Geoffrey},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Journal = {International Journal of American Linguistics},
	Pages = {192--214},
	Title = {Object-initial languages},
	Volume = {47},
	Year = {1981}}

@inproceedings{Munn:1994,
	Address = {Amherst, Massachusetts},
	Author = {Munn, Alan},
	Booktitle = {Proceedings of the {N}orth {E}ast {L}inguistic {S}ociety},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Editor = {Gonz{\`a}lez, Merc{\`e}},
	Pages = {397--410},
	Publisher = {Graduate Linguistic Student Association},
	Title = {A Minimalist Account of Reconstuction Asymmetries},
	Volume = {24},
	Year = {1994}}

@unpublished{Fox:2006,
	Author = {Fox, Danny and Pesetsky, David},
	Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400},
	Note