%% This BibTeX bibliography file was created using BibDesk. %% http://bibdesk.sourceforge.net/ %% Created for Kyle Johnson at 2012-04-01 15:16:27 -0400 %% Saved with string encoding Unicode (UTF-8) @article{Kishida:2012, Abstract = {Tsujimura and Aikawa (J Assoc Teach Jpn 33: 26--43, 1999) argue that objectless zi-verbs in Japanese uniformly have the unaccusative argument structure based on two tests for unaccusativity (resultative predication and quantifier floating). In this paper, we provide new evidence against their uniform unaccusative analysis. Applying several other diagnostics for external/internal argumenthood in Japanese, we demonstrate that objectless zi-verbs instantiate a full range of argument structure configurations: (a) transitive (e.g., zi-satu-suru `kill oneself'), (b) unaccusative (e.g., zi-kai-suru `collapse by itself'), and (c) unergative (e.g., zi-sui-suru `cook for oneself'). We further show that our new analysis framed in terms of the Lexical Conceptual Structure not only derives the various properties of the three types of objectless zi-verbs but also derives the different argument structural functions and meanings that the zi-morpheme is associated with in each type.}, Author = {Kishida, Maki and Sato, Yosuke}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:15:01 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:16:06 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {197--218}, Title = {On the argument structure of \emph{Zi}-verbs in {J}apanese: reply to {T}sujimura and {A}ikawa (1999)}, Volume = {21}, Year = {2012}} @article{Grosu:2012, Abstract = {Grosu (J East Asian Linguist 19:231--274, 2010) argues against analyses of Japanese and Korean internally headed relative clauses in terms of discourse anaphora and in favor of an analysis which postulates a functional category ChR (Choose Role) in the syntax of these constructions, the semantics of which allows quantificational disclosure. The present paper constitutes a follow-up on Grosu (2010), with the interrelated goals of (i) strengthening Grosu's arguments against discourse anaphora approaches and in favor of a grammar-based quantificational disclosure approach, (ii) improving substantively on the syntactic and semantic characterization of the functional category ChR, and (iii) justifying the introduction of additional mechanisms that render that analysis adequate with respect to a substantially wider set of data types. The proposals made in the present paper strengthen Grosu's central thesis, which is that, despite undeniable partial similarities to discourse anaphora, Japanese and Korean internally headed relatives are bona fide relatives. The paper shows the semantic fruitfulness of this analysis by discussing a series of examples of increasing semantic complexity and by arguing that Japanese and Korean internally headed relatives provide striking evidence for a semantic scope mechanism that has been independently discussed in the context of the semantics of plurality and cumulative readings, a mechanism that allows part of the meaning of (argument) noun phrases to take local (adverbial) scope.}, Author = {Grosu, Alexander and Landman, Fred}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:13:37 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:14:27 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {159--196}, Title = {A quantificational disclosure approach to {J}apanese and {K}orean internally headed relatives}, Volume = {21}, Year = {2012}} @article{Wu:2012, Abstract = {In this paper, I discuss argument reduction and anaphora resolution of xiang−verbs in Mandarin Chinese. When xiang is prefixed to a verbal stem, one of the arguments of the verbal stem is absorbed, xiang functions as an anaphor replacing the absorbed argument and hence requires an antecedent. I argue that the argument reduction of xiang−verbs depends on the Thematic Role Hierarchy (Bresnan and Kanerva, Language 70:72--131, 1989; Bresnan, Linguistic Inq 20(1):10--50, 1993): the second highest role on the argument structure of a verbal stem to which xiang is attached, is absorbed. For anaphora resolution, I propose a non-subject constraint, Available Candidates for xiang, which includes a principle utilizing attachment sites of Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (for short, SDRT) to determine a set of candidates for the antecedent to xiang a last resort to include the speaker and addressee(s) in the set when there is no available candidate, and a pragmatic principle to select the most fitting one from the set of candidates to be the antecedent to xiang. And, I propose an SDRT account for the phenomena observed. I also discuss the reciprocity of xiang-verbs and suggest that reciprocal xiang-verbs and non-reciprocal xiang-verbs have the same origin. Furthermore, I demonstrate that the SDRT account argued in this paper can be extended to zero anaphora resolution (with some modification) and is, at least to a certain degree, applicable to the resolution of the third person singular anaphor ta `he/she'.}, Author = {Wu, J.-S.}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:12:08 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:13:04 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {115--158}, Title = {Argument reduction and anaphora resolution: the case of \emph{xiang}-verbs in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {21}, Year = {2012}} @article{Duanmu:2012, Abstract = {Are there preferred word-length combinations in Chinese? If there are, are they motivated by semantics, syntax, prosody, or a combination of these? While the issue has been discussed for some time, opinions remain divided. This study offers a quantitative analysis of word-length patterns in Chinese [N N] and [V O] sequences, using the Lancaster Corpus of Mandarin Chinese. It is found that 1+2 is overwhelmingly disfavored in [N N] and 2+1 is overwhelmingly disfavored in [V O]. In addition, it is found that apparent exceptions, ranging between 1 and 2%, are limited to certain specific structures, and when these are factored out, both 1+2 [N N] and 2+1 [V O] are well below 1% in either token count or type count. The result bears on several theoretical debates, such as the validity of word-length preferences in Chinese, the motivation of the preferences, the extent and the nature of exceptions, and the interaction among syntax, semantics, and phonology.}, Author = {Duanmu, San}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:10:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:11:30 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {89--114}, Title = {Word-length preferences in {C}hinese: a corpus study}, Volume = {21}, Year = {2012}} @article{Yang:2012, Abstract = {The exploration on wh-intervention effects generally suffers from distributional variations both across and within languages. In this study, a specific, clear divide with respect to wh-intervention effects in Mandarin Chinese is investigated, which in turn sheds light on the puzzling variations in general. I show that the variations of intervention effects cannot be handled in a uniform way. They can be at best captured if we categorize them into two types of syntactic effects, i.e., minimality effect and competition effect, each of which is triggered by independent factors. Meanwhile, to cover the intervention effects crosslinguistically, it is essential to take into account the typological difference of in-situ wh-construals. The various distributions of intervention effects are, then, a natural result of the interplay between the different types of intervention effects and wh-construals.}, Author = {Yang, Barry Chung-Yu}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:09:46 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:10:22 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {43--87}, Title = {Intervention effects and \emph{wh}-construals}, Volume = {21}, Year = {2012}} @article{Kishimoto:2012, Abstract = {Subject honorification in Japanese is often characterized as targeting subjects, but in this article, I propose to formulate it as vP-level agreement, where an honorific head agrees with an argument (carrying the semantic feature [+honorific]) that appears in its associated Spec,vP. This proposal provides a straightforward account for some honorification facts which cannot be accounted for if subject honorification is simply taken to target subjects: namely, (1) the fact that subject honorification is often, but not always, possible at two distinct structural levels in the aspectual construction where the main verb is followed by the aspectual verb iru; (2) the fact that in the possessive construction with the animate verb iru `have', subject honorification can target not only the dative subject but also the nominative object. Furthermore, on the basis of what I call `the kara-subject construction', the overt constituent position of subjects is shown to vary according to whether T contains the Case feature [+nominative] to license a nominative argument: Subjects undergo raising to Spec,TP when T carries [+nominative], but when T lacks it, subjects are not raised to Spec,TP.}, Author = {Kishimoto, Hideki}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:08:22 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:09:13 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--41}, Title = {Subject honorification and the position of subjects in {J}apanese}, Volume = {21}, Year = {2012}} @article{Yang:2011, Abstract = {This paper proposes a unified account for the different meanings and unique distribution of --le. This new account is based on two major arguments: (1) temporal endpoints are provided via a parameter that varies across languages (i.e., some languages rely heavily on tense, while others rely on lexical expressions or other mechanisms), and (2) accomplishment and achievement verbs should be re-sorted in accordance with the new leading to result ([>result]) and encoding result ([⊃result]) criterion. I have shown that the interaction between the parametric variation in providing endpoints and the meanings of different types of situations, not only accounts for the restricted occurrence of -le with [-telic] situations, but also explains a) the possibility of non-completion readings for some [>result] situations in Chinese, b) the impossibility of non-completion readings for [⊃result] situations in both Chinese and English, and c) the possible present continuative readings for certain types of verbs in Chinese.}, Author = {Yang, Suying}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:07:04 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:07:46 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {383--415}, Title = {The parameter of temporal endpoint and the basic function of \emph{-le}}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Sato:2011a, Abstract = {This paper presents novel evidence that P-stranding in Indonesian contradicts Merchant's (The syntax of silence: sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis, 2001) generalization that P-stranding under sluicing is possible only in those languages that allow this option under regular wh-movement. It is proposed that this apparently special pattern is accounted for by the recent idea of repair by ellipsis (Ross, in Binnick et al. (eds.) Papers from the 5th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 1969; Merchant, The syntax of silence: sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis; Lasnik, M: Kim and Strauss (eds.) Proceedings of NELS 31, 2001). Specifically, the failure of percolation of the wh-feature is repaired by PF deletion. P-stranding in French and German cannot be so repaired since the violation in question is a strictly computational violation caused by D-to-P incorporation. Our cross-linguistic examination of P-stranding suggests a bifurcated view of violations (Boeckx and Lasnik in Linguistic Inquiry 37: 150--155, 2006); violations pertaining to the syntax-phonology interface in principle can be repaired whereas violations incurred within the syntactic computation cannot. This contrast in ``reparability'' naturally falls out from a minimalist architecture of the syntax-phonology interface. A broader implication of the present analysis is that syntax is itself not a crash-proof system in the sense of Frampton and Gutmann (Syntax 2:1--27, 1999; Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program. Blackwell, Oxford, 2002); it could produce certain operational failures, but language-particular parameters afford a bit of leeway for PF to remedy them at the syntax-phonology interface.}, Author = {Sato, Yosuke}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:05:21 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:06:25 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {339--382}, Title = {P-stranding under sluicing and repair by ellipsis: why is {I}ndonesian (not) special?}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Chappell:2011, Abstract = {This analysis sets out to specifically discuss the polyfunctionality of 跟[kai55] in Waxiang (Sinitic), whose lexical source is the verb `to follow'. Amongst its various uses, we find a preposition `with, along', a marker of adjuncts and a NP conjunction, thus superficially resembling its Mandarin cognate 跟g{\=e}n `with'. Curiously, however, it has also evolved into a direct object marker in Waxiang, with a function similar to that of the preposition 把b{\v a} < `hold, take' as found in the S-b{\v a}-OVP or so-called `disposal' form in standard Mandarin. The pathways of grammaticalization for 跟[kai55] inWaxiang are thus discussed in order to determine how it has developed this unusual grammatical function in one of the linguistic zones of China where verbs of giving or taking are, in fact, the main source for grammaticalized object markers in `disposal' constructions. On the basis of sixteenth and seventeenth century Southern Min literature (Sinitic), a comparison is also made with analogous developments for comitative 共kang 7 (Mandarin g{\`o}ng) `with' to provide support for our hypothesis that the direct object marking use has evolved from the oblique function of a benefactive or dative, and is clearly separate from the crosslinguistically well-attested pathway that leads to its use as a conjunction. We would thus like to propose that these data contribute a new pattern to the stock of grammaticalization pathways, specifically, comitative > dative/benefactive > accusative (direct object marker).}, Author = {Chappell, Hilary and Peyraube, Alain and Wu, Yunji}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:03:45 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:04:40 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {291--338}, Title = {A comitative source for object markers in Sinitic languages}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Wei:2011, Abstract = {This study employs the island repair effect on the Left Branch Condition (LBC) to illuminate the derivation of Mandarin sluicing. It utilizes three unique properties of Mandarin island repair related to the LBC involving (i) covert antecedents, (ii) contrastive modifiers, and (iii) multiple islands including LBC structures in order to examine two deletion-based analyses of sluicing in the literature. It is shown that these analyses fail to satisfactorily explain the properties discussed. To capture the facts, a pseudosluicing analysis is proposed which claims that sluiced clauses in Mandarin are simply composed of a subject pro, an (optional) copula shi `be', and a wh-in-situ wh-remnant serving as a predicate. The strong redemptive ability of repairing LBC effects in Mandarin is attributed to the construal of pro instead of deletion. From a typological point of view, among East Asian languages, Mandarin sluices differ from Japanese and Korean sluices in that the pro of the former cannot be interpreted as a concealed cleft structure but instead functions as an implicit subject.}, Author = {Wei, Ting-Chi}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:02:16 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:03:05 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {255--289}, Title = {Island repair effects of the {L}eft {B}ranch {C}ondition in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Takano:2011, Abstract = {This article examines the nature of double complement unaccusatives in Japanese, namely, unaccusative constructions having a goal argument as well as a theme argument. It is shown that double complement unaccusatives exhibit puzzling properties with respect to two diagnostics for subjecthood---binding of zibun and subject honorification; specifically, (i) unlike other constructions, where only one argument (i.e., the subject) can antecede zibun, double complement unaccusatives allow both the theme and the goal arguments to antecede zibun and (ii) unlike binding of zibun, subject honorification can be licensed only by the theme argument. It is proposed that these puzzling properties can receive a natural account if (i) in Japanese ``subject'' is defined as an element that satisfies v's EPP feature and (ii) the goal argument of Japanese unaccusatives is a PP. It is also shown that this proposal has important implications for the nature of subject orientation, the EPP, and the (dative) Case.}, Author = {Takano, Yuji}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:01:03 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:01:41 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {229--254}, Title = {Double complement unaccusatives in {J}apanese: puzzles and implications}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Abe:2011, Abstract = {This paper aims to demonstrate that there exist real parasitic gaps (PG) in Japanese, despite the fact that pro is available rather freely in this language, hence making it hard to unveil the existence of real PGs. Taking up Takahashi's (J East Asian Linguistics 15: 1--35, 2006) work as the starting point, I argue that as far as NP gaps are concerned, what Takahashi calls an apparent PG is identified as either a real PG or an instance of pro, contrary to Takahashi's claim that it involves argument ellipsis. Real PG cases are found in typical PG configurations where sloppy readings of zibun `self' are involved and where reconstruction effects of Condition A take place into PGs. I further argue that the argument-ellipsis strategy is unavailable in the apparent PG configuration due to its last resort nature. This property restricts the availability of argument ellipsis to the configuration in which the elliptic site is not c-commanded by its antecedent or it is not an NP in categorial status.}, Author = {Abe, Jun}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 19:00:00 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 19:00:31 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {195--218}, Title = {Real parasitic gaps in {J}apanese}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kawahara:2011a, Abstract = {Nishimura (M.A. thesis, 2003) first pointed out that in Japanese loan words, voiced geminates devoice optionally when they co-occur with another voiced obstruent, i.e., when they violate OCP(voice) (e.g., /baggu/ → [bakku] `bag'). This devoicing of geminates has been used to make several theoretical claims in the recent phonological literature. However, these claims have so far largely been based on intuition-based data provided by Nishimura (M.A. thesis, 2003) and Kawahara (Language 82(3):536--574, 2006). Kawahara (Nat Lang Linguist Theory, 2011a) addressed this problem by conducting a rating study. The first aim of this study, building on Kawahara (Nat Lang Linguist Theory, 2011a), is to further support the empirical foundation of these theoretical claims by way of a large-scale rating study. The current study shows that (i) the OCP and geminacy each affect naturalness rating of devoicing, and (ii) there is nevertheless something special about the combination of the OCP and geminacy. The second aim is to test an assumption behind the recent literature on this phenomenon. The assumption is that this devoicing pattern is monolithic---i.e., all voiced geminates uniformly undergo devoicing in a certain phonological environment. The current experiment shows that this assumption is too simplistic. In particular it shows (i) speakers rate the devoicing of affricates as natural as that of stops, (ii) speakers find devoicing of items that merge with other lexical items less natural, (iii) speakers rate devoicing as more natural when there are multiple triggers, (iv) speakers find devoicing of [dd] more natural than that of [gg], and (v) speakers find devoicing of more frequent items more natural.}, Author = {Kawahara, Shigeto}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:58:49 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:59:23 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {169--194}, Title = {Aspects of {J}apanese loanword devoicing}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Liao:2011, Abstract = {This paper examines multiple-classifier constructions in Chinese, in which two classifiers are stacked in one nominal position. The following three properties are found in these constructions: (i) strict linear ordering between different types of classifiers, (ii) definiteness/specificity of the lower DP, and (iii) obligatory non-distributive readings. The properties of multiple-classifier constructions allow us to study the syntax and semantics of nominal expressions in Chinese from a novel point of view. We argue that, syntactically, and against the bare NP analysis in Chierchia (in: Rothstein S (ed) Events and grammar, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 53--103, 1998a, Nat Lang Semant 6:339--405, 1998b) and the Classifier Phrase analysis in Cheng and Sybesma (Linguist Inq 30:509--542, 1999; in: Cinque G, Kayne R (ed) The Oxford handbook of comparative syntax, Oxford University Press, pp 259--292, 2005), from the properties of multiple-classifier constructions, a universal DP analysis is favored (as in Li, Linguist Inq 29: 693--702, 1998). Incorporating the theories in Zamparelli (in: Alexiadou A, Wilder C (eds) Linguistics today: possessors, predicates and movement in the determiner phrase, vol 22, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 259--301, 1998) and Dayal (Linguist Philos 27:393--450, 2004), we demonstrate that a generalized Chierchian approach (without his semantic parameter) best captures the syntax--semantics mappings within nominal expressions in Chinese. From a compositional semantic point of view, we argue that multiple-classifier constructions should be treated as an instance of partitive construction with an empty partitive head. The hypothesis of an empty partitive head not only accounts for the properties of the multiple-classifier constructions, but it also offers explanations for the asymmetry of partitive readings in Chinese relative clauses.}, Author = {Liao, Wei-wen Roger and Wang, Yuyun Iris}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:57:04 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:57:56 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {145--168}, Title = {Multiple-classifier constructions and nominal expressions in {C}hinese}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Tsujioka:2011, Abstract = {This paper replies to Kishimoto's (2008, J East Asian Linguist 17: 141--179) challenge to Miyagawa and Tsujioka (2004, J East Asian Linguist 13: 1--38) on the use of idioms as evidence for the base-generation hypothesis for Japanese ditransitives. I will point out problems with Kishimoto's proposal, then present alternative analyses of Kishimoto's data. I will argue that a closer look at a wider range of data including mixed marking cases of sa-nominalization in both idiomatic and non-idiomatic contexts lends further support for Miyagawa and Tsujioka (2004). In so doing, I will present data that support Watanabe (2009, J East Asian Linguist 19:61--74) to posit dual status of no.}, Author = {Tsujioka, Takae}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:55:36 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:56:25 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {117--143}, Title = {Idioms, mixed marking in nominalization, and the base-generation hypothesis for ditransitives in {J}apanese}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Tang:2011, Abstract = {It is argued that the ``true empty category'' in Mandarin NP ellipsis is not necessarily a semantically empty structure-less position; instead it could have a complex structure, containing a referential head. Such a referential head is, however, missing in Cantonese. The dialectal variation between Mandarin and Cantonese is attributed to the noun movement parameter, which has been independently motivated in the literature.}, Author = {Tang, Sze-Wing}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:54:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:55:03 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {107--115}, Title = {A parametric approach to {NP} ellipsis in {M}andarin and {C}antonese}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Soh:2011, Abstract = {The verbal prefix meN- in Malay is known to block DP movement. The existing analyses of this phenomenon focus on the blocking effect of meN- in transitive sentences but have not paid attention to whether such an effect holds in intransitive sentences. In this paper, we examine the blocking effect of meN- in intransitive sentences and show that, surprisingly, meN- does not appear to block DP movement in sentences that are usually considered unaccusative. We propose that no blocking effect is found in intransitive sentences because all intransitive meN- sentences are unergative. We present a hypothesis of the relation between verb meaning and sentence structure that accounts for meN-'s effect on verb syntax, making use of the notion of telicity and the distinction between ``internal'' and ``external'' causation. Our analysis implies that both lexical specification and structural determination are involved in determining the unergative/unaccusative distinction.}, Author = {Soh, Hooi Ling and Nomoto, Hiroki}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:52:39 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:53:34 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {77--106}, Title = {The {M}alay verbal prefix \emph{meN-} and the unergative/unaccusative distinction}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kaufmann:2011, Abstract = {The interpretation of Japanese temporal clauses depends on an intricate interplay between a number of factors including, in addition to the temporal connective, the tense and aspectual properties of the embedded clause as well as the matrix clause. This paper presents a detailed survey of these interactions and a model-theoretic compositional analysis which improves significantly over previous proposals in terms of attention to empirical detail and internal simplicity.}, Author = {Kaufmann, Stefan and Miyachi, Misa}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:51:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:52:02 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {33--76}, Title = {On the temporal interpretation of {J}apanese temporal clause}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Oshima:2011, Abstract = {The Japanese toki-clause, a kind of temporal adverbial clause, exhibits several interesting properties regarding the semantic interpretation and selection of an embedded tense form. This paper argues that toki is ambiguous in three ways and may indicate three different temporal relations between the matrix eventuality (ME) and the subordinate eventuality (SE): (i) ME is simultaneous with SE (the WHEN-interpretation), (ii) ME is immediately prior to SE (the RIGHT BEFORE-interpretation), and (iii) ME is immediately subsequent to SE (the RIGHT AFTER-interpretation). Problems with existing analyses that seek a uniform treatment of toki will be pointed out, and it will be demonstrated that the proposed analysis provides a thorough and consistent account of the possible interpretations of toki-clauses under different conditions.}, Author = {Oshima, David Y.}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:49:42 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:50:43 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--32}, Title = {On the interpretation of \emph{toki}-clauses: beyond the absolutive/relative dichotomy}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2011}} @article{Gobbo:2010, Abstract = {There is currently no consensus in the literature with the respect to the semantic status of relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese. Some authors (Zhang 2001; Del Gobbo 2003, 2004, 2005) claim that relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese can only be interpreted as restrictives; others (see Lin 2003) instead maintain that relative clauses in this language can be both restrictive and appositive. In this paper, I claim that Chinese relative clauses modifying proper names and pronouns can indeed be appositive, but they are still crucially different from appositive relative clauses in English. Following Cinque's (2006a, 2008a) distinction between ``integrated appositive relative clauses'' and ``non-integrated'' ones, I claim that Chinese appositive relatives belong to the class of the ``integrated'' ones. I furthermore propose that the typological difference between the ``integrated'' appositives and the ``non-integrated'' ones is due to the absence versus presence of the relative pronoun. Adopting Cinque's (2006a, 2008a) theory of relativization, I propose a structure for Chinese relative clauses whereby c-command of the internal head of the relative is disallowed. This explains why the internal head of the Chinese relative clause can never be generated as a relative pronoun and, more generally, why overt relative pronouns are unavailable in prenominal relative clauses cross-linguistically. Last, the theory here outlined makes the strong empirical prediction that no prenominal relative clause can be appositive in the canonical sense.}, Author = {Gobbo, Francesca Del}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:48:26 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:49:12 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {385--417}, Title = {On {C}hinese appositive relative clauses}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Ito:2010, Abstract = {This paper tries to elucidate the asymmetric distribution of stem-final coronal (SFC) obstruent codas in the nouns of Contemporary Korean (CK) by documenting their historical development from Middle Korean (fifteenth to sixteenth centuries, MK). Examination of historical data suggests that there was an intermediate stage in Korean in which [s] was far and away the most prevalent phonetic value and thus triggered analogical extension to other SFCs through a stage of free variation between [s] and [t]. Subsequent developments involving the completion of the occlusivization of [s] obscure this state of affairs. Two other factors which resulted in the biased distribution of SFCs in CK are also pointed out: (1) the simplification of SFCs' oppositions in polysyllabic words based on their near-complementary distribution and (2) the type-frequency of MK SFCs, which takes into account compound words as well as simplex (= non-compound) words.}, Author = {Ito, Chiyuki}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:46:57 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:47:52 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {357--383}, Title = {Analogy and lexical restructuring in the development of nominal stem inflection from {M}iddle to {C}ontemporary {K}orean}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Takahashi:2010a, Abstract = {One of the central issues in the current Minimalist Program is the exact definition of phases. This article argues for a specific interpretation of phases, based on an account of a scope puzzle in the Nominative/Accusative conversion in Japanese. I show that the puzzle is best accounted for by postulating QR, which is bound by domains of Case-valuation. Based on an observation that scope of QR is phase-bound, I conclude that phases are determined via Case-valuation. This suggests that phases are not determined intrinsically, but contextually. The analysis has an implication for the landing site of short scrambling.}, Author = {Takahashi, Masahiko}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:45:26 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:46:21 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {319--355}, Title = {Case, Phases, and Nominative/Accusative Conversion in {J}apanese}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Lee:2010, Abstract = {The naturalness with which case ellipsis occurs in certain environments in Korean has been attributed to the information status and markedness of arguments. In recent accounts of case ellipsis in colloquial Korean proposed by Lee (Lang Res 42:323--355, 2006a; J Pragmat 39:1465--1481, 2007) and Kim (PhD dissertation, 2008), the effects of these factors on case ellipsis have been subsumed under iconicity of complexity. In this paper we argue that iconicity plays no role in stating and explaining patterns of variation in case ellipsis and propose an alternative usage-based explanation in terms of economy. This proposal subsumes and clarifies previous findings about the influence of the factors of contrastiveness, animacy, and definiteness and connects these findings to asymmetries in frequency and predictability. In addition, the economy account leads to a number of other predictions that the iconicity account does not make, including differences in the direction of the effects of contrastiveness and animacy/definiteness and differences between subject and object marking. Using evidence from two rating experiments, this paper also demonstrates that preference for case ellipsis on three subtypes of focused objects (selecting, replacing, and informational focus) increases relative to the degree of predictability whereas average ratings between sentences with these subtypes of focus subjects do not show a statistically significant difference. This finding is not consistent with the prediction of the iconicity-of-the-complexity principle and cannot be accounted for in terms of the dichotomous distinction between contrastive vs. non-contrastive focus. This paper is the first demonstration that the gradient pattern of case ellipsis shown by subtypes of focus can be explained in terms of asymmetries in frequency and predictability, i.e., the economy principle, and suggests that it may be possible to explain the effects of information structural factors and animacy/definiteness on the ellipsis of case markers for both focused and non-focus arguments entirely through the economy principle.}, Author = {Lee, Hanjung}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:44:08 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:45:05 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {291--318}, Title = {Explaining variation in {K}orean case ellipsis: Economy versus iconicity}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hong:2010, Abstract = {This paper argues that both Korean and English have ``Raising to Object'' in ECM constructions and that in both languages the raising is obligatory out of small clauses and optional out of full clauses. Abstractly, the two languages are quite similar in this regard. However, there remain obvious differences between the two languages: In Korean, but not English, raising is possible out of a finite clause; in English, but not Korean, accusative Case marking can take place without raising. We suggest that these differences follow from the nature of the Case properties of Infl in the two languages, apparently a relatively simple parameter.}, Author = {Hong, Sungshim and Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:42:31 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:43:21 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {275--289}, Title = {A note on `Raising to Object' in small clauses and full clauses}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Grosu:2010, Abstract = {The principal thesis defended in this paper is that the most recent and successful approach to the internally-headed relative (IHR) constructions of Japanese and Korean, i.e., the one in Kim (Nat Lang Semant 15:279--315, 2007)---which proposes, building on Hoshi (Structural and interpretive aspects of head-internal and head-external relative clauses, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Rochester, 1995) and Shimoyama (J East Asian Linguist 8:147--182, 1999; Wh-constructions in Japenese, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 2001), that the analysis of these IHRs needs to rely on the E-type strategy---is demonstrably wrong empirically in relation to both the procedure for licensing IHs and the characterization of temporal relations between the IHR and its matrix, as well as conceptually objectionable in attaching the E-type label to analyses that have to rely on mechanisms that are entirely independent of those used in analyses of E-type anaphora in discourse. The paper proposes an alternative analysis that avoids the difficulties encountered by E-type analyses, and which relies on local equation of the IH with a variable, ultimately assigning to the relative clause the status of a singleton predicate, thereby bringing these IHRs under the more general umbrella of definite/maximalizing relative constructions, while at the same time providing a motivated account of certain similarities between such IHRs and E-type anaphora, which, while real, do not justify an analytical reduction of the former to the latter.}, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:41:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:42:07 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {231--274}, Title = {The status of internally-headed relatives of {J}apanese/{K}orean within the typology of \emph{definite} relatives}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Li:2010, Abstract = {Two experiments explored two- to five-year-old Mandarin-speaking children's acquisition of classifiers, mandatory morphemes for expressing quantities in many Asian languages. Classifiers are similar to measure words in English (e.g., a piece of apple; a cup of apples), with the main difference being that classifiers are also required when counting sortals (e.g., yi ge pinguo or ``one unit apple'' in Mandarin means ``one apple''). The current study extended prior studies (e.g., Chien et al., J East Asian Linguist 12:91--120, 2003) to examine Mandarin-speaking children's understanding of classifiers as indicating units of quantification. Children were also tested on their knowledge of numerals to assess the relationship between children's acquisition of numerals and classifiers. The findings suggest that children first notice that sortal classifiers specify properties such as shape. Only after learning some numerals do they begin to work out how classifiers indicate units of quantification. By age four, children scored above chance on most classifiers tested.}, Author = {Li, Peggy and Huang, Becky and Hsiao, Yaling}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:39:37 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:40:38 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {207--230}, Title = {Learning that classifiers count: {M}andarin-speaking children's acquisition of sortal and mensural classifiers}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Liu:2010, Abstract = {This paper analyzes Taiwanese A-CL sequences as compound adjectives by treating the classifier inside such sequences as a dimension provider and the adjective as involving an ordering function. Combined with the assumption that classifiers occurring as the CL of A-CL compound adjectives should be divided into single-dimension denoting and multi-dimension denoting elements, the analysis provides a rationale for why the adjectives permitted in A-CL compound adjectives have the interesting and otherwise perplexing property of being so limited in number.}, Author = {Liu, Chen-Sheng Luther}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:37:55 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:39:00 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {181--205}, Title = {Dimension-denoting classifiers in {T}aiwanese compound adjectives}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Jun:2010, Abstract = {It has been observed in the literature that stem-final coronal obstruents of nouns in Korean are generally in variation with [s] in the prevocalic position: for example, /pathh-ɨl/ [pathh-ɨl] ~ [pasɨl] `field, accusative'. In addition, nouns with final noncoronal stops have variants ending in lenis stops: for example, /iph-e/ [iph-e] ~ [ipe] `leaf, locative'. Recent survey and experimental studies reveal that a wide set of coronal obstruents [s, ch, th, c, t] may occur as variants. Moreover, there is an order of preference among them: in general, s >> ch, th >> c, t. This paper first shows that the observed relative preference among variants is matched by the distribution of lexical final obstruents in noun stems. Building on Albright's Paradigm Learning Model, I provide a unified account for the occurrence of most variants and their relative preference by proposing stochastic rules deriving the paradigmatically related forms of noun stems. In addition, a wug-test is carried out to investigate the productivity of such rules. Results suggest that these rules are productive, providing the evidence for their cognitive presence.}, Author = {Jun, Jongho}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:36:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:37:33 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {137--179}, Title = {Stem-final obstruent variation in {K}orean}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Tsung-Ying:2010, Abstract = {This paper reviews a previous assumption that contour tones are units (i.e., Contour Tone Unit, CTU) in Asian tone languages and can therefore spread, assimilate, or dissimilate as wholes. One problem for such an assumption is that not all Asian languages pattern uniformly, and some show a rather different, prototypically African tone language pattern. Furthermore, the assumption yields analytical gaps which need to be covered by more arbitrary rules. In this paper non-CTU approaches are proposed to re-analyze contour tone sandhi in various Chinese dialects with broader generalizations and stronger explanations. The paper also argues against the CTU since the contrast between it and the non-CTU has never been reported. Despite the fact that some phonetic differences have been discovered between two identical contour tones, the differences are not necessarily mapped with different contour tone representations (i.e., CTU vs. non-CTU). In sum, since the CTU is not beneficial analytically and theoretically, there is no reason to consider it as part of Universal Grammar.}, Author = {Tsung-Ying, Chen}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:35:51 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:36:28 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {103--135}, Title = {Some remarks on Contour Tone Units}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Meisterernst:2010, Abstract = {In this paper, one of the three instances of object preposing in Classical Chinese, the structure [NP1 NP2 shi / zhi V], is discussed in detail. According to their distributional differences, two structures---A [NP1 NP2 shi V] and B [NP1 NP2 zhi V]---are distinguished, and it is shown that both constructions, although sometimes identical in the surface structure, are subject to different syntactic and semantic constraints. This analysis challenges the hypothesis proposed by Peyraube (Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientales 26(1):3--20, 1997) that structure A [NP1 NP2 shi V] was gradually replaced by structure B [NP1 NP2 zhi V] during the Warring States period. In accordance with the syntactic constraints, different analyses are proposed for structures A and B in the course of the paper. Structure A, [NPS NPO shi V], is analyzed as a copula construction, a focalization (cleft) construction with the object not in preverbal position but to the right of the copula. Structure B, which is more heterogeneous than structure A, will be subdivided into different structures, only two of which will be retained as cases of a focalized and preposed object. The analysis reveals that object preposing in Classical Chinese is evidently a case of marked word order and cannot be assumed to be a vestige of an earlier SOV word order in Chinese.}, Author = {Meisterernst, Barbara}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:33:55 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:34:57 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {75--102}, Title = {Object Preposing in {C}lassical and {P}re-{M}edieval {C}hinese}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Watanabe:2010a, Abstract = {This paper investigates ellipsis within nominals in Japanese with reference to a wider range of data than that considered by Saito et al. (JEAL 17: 247-- 271, 2008). It is shown that the interaction with ellipsis reveals two types of no, a genitive case particle and a linking element inserted morphologically. To accommodate the additional ellipsis data, the analysis that treats the numeral-classifier sequence as an adjunct to NP must be rejected.}, Author = {Watanabe, Akira}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:32:35 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:33:30 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {61--74}, Title = {Notes on nominal ellipsis and the nature of \emph{no} and classifiers in {J}apanese}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Asanyo:2010, Abstract = {This paper shows that, contrary to preceding studies, a dialect spoken in a western region of Japan (Kansai dialect) allows not only nominative Case, as is widely known in literature, but also accusative Case, to convert into genitive Case in a prenominal clause. We will call this phenomenon Accusative-Genitive conversion. This phenomenon has been little known in theoretical literature because of its limited occurrence. As our detailed survey reveals, this less-known Case conversion is possible only if some conditions on the clause in which the conversion appears are satisfied. We also demonstrate that those necessary conditions for Accusative-Genitive conversion are, indeed, deduced by some independently supported hypotheses under the Agree/Phase theory. Thus, Accusative-Genitive conversion is within the realm of the Agree/Phase theory, and the characteristic conditions on its occurrence, in turn, lend support to the recent syntactic theory. Our theory of this phenomenon further predicts that, if our mechanism serves as an independent mechanism for genitive-Case valuation, it will also function as converting nominative Case into genitive Case. It will be shown that this is indeed the Case, which strongly supports the validity of our mechanism in Kansai Japanese.}, Author = {Asanyo, Shin'ya and Ura, Hiroyuki}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:30:57 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:31:55 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {37--59}, Title = {Mood and Case: with special reference to genitive Case conversion in {K}ansai {J}apanese}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Aldridge:2010, Abstract = {This paper proposes an analysis of wh-movement in late archaic Chinese as clause-internal focus fronting to the edge of vP. The paper further shows that archaic Chinese wh-words were indefinites, as in modern Chinese, and that their interpretation was obtained in the c-command domain of an appropriate trigger, a base-generated operator in [Spec, CP] in the case of wh-questions. The non-quantificational status of wh-words accords well with the short movement analysis since this movement did not serve to place the wh-word in the interrogative scope position in the left periphery of the clause. In this way, the paper also offers a contribution to the growing debate concerning the relationship between wh-movement and the status of wh-words as operators or indefinites. The conclusion here is that movement of wh-indefinites is not unexpected if the landing site is lower than the interrogative scope position.}, Author = {Aldridge, Edith}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:29:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:30:08 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--36}, Title = {Clause-internal \emph{wh}-movement in {A}rchaic {C}hinese}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2010}} @article{Shimoyama:2012, Abstract = {This paper looks at one area of potential crosslinguistic variation in comparatives. It has recently been claimed that Japanese clausal comparatives lack degree abstraction structures in the complement of yori `than'. Based on data from several empirical domains such as predicative adjectival comparatives, intensional contexts, and negative islands, this paper shows that Japanese clausal comparatives do not in general contrast with their English counterparts in the way predicted by the above claim. The syntactic and semantic phenomena observed in Japanese clausal comparatives receive straightforward accounts if we assume that they do involve degree abstraction and degree comparison, along the lines familiar from analyses of their English counterparts.}, Author = {Shimoyama, Junko}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:26:27 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:27:18 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {83--113}, Title = {Reassessing crosslinguitsic variation in clausal comparatives}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2012}} @article{Hackl:2012, Abstract = {This squib presents two puzzles related to an ambiguity found in for-infinitival relative clauses (FIRs). FIRs invariably receive a modal interpretation even in the absence of any overt modal verb. The modal interpretation seems to come in two distinct types, which can be paraphrased by finite relative clauses employing the modal auxiliaries should and could. The two puzzles presented here arise because the availability of the two readings is constrained by factors that are not otherwise known to affect the interpretation of a relative clause. Specifically, we show, first, that ``strong'' determiners require the FIR to be interpreted as a SHOULD-relative while ``weak'' determiners allow both interpretations (the Determiner-Modal Generalization). Secondly, we observe that the COULD-interpretation requires a raising (internally headed) structure for the FIR, while the SHOULD-interpretation is compatible with either a raising or a more standard matching (externally headed) structure (the Raising/Matching Generalization).}, Author = {Hackl, Martin and Nissenbaum, Jon}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:24:50 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:25:52 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {59--81}, Title = {A modal ambiguity in \emph{for}-infinitival relative clauses}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2012}} @article{Gajewski:2012, Abstract = {The existence of ``local implicatures'' has been the topic of much recent debate. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to this debate by asking what we can learn from three puzzles, namely, the cancellation of such implicatures by or both, their behavior in the complement clauses of negative factive verbs such as sorry, and their behavior in root and embedded questions. Two basic approaches to local implicatures have been advanced: a fully pragmatic account in which local implicatures result from conventional Gricean principles and a semantic account according to which the generation of implicatures is interwoven with compositional, grammatical mechanisms. We argue that the lesson to be learned from our three case studies is that some kind of approach along the latter, grammatical line is necessary to account for the data.}, Author = {Gajewski, Jon and Sharvit, Yael}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:23:32 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:24:21 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {31--57}, Title = {In defense of grammatical approach to local implicatures}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2012}} @article{Kucerova:2012, Abstract = {Schwarzschild (Nat Lang Semant 7:141--177, 1999)'s account of givenness elaborates a notion of complementarity of givenness and focus in an intricate way: while givenness is semantically interpreted, focus is grammatically marked. It has been noticed, however, that under certain circumstances givenness in English is grammatically marked as well. Movement plays a role in this process. This paper provides further evidence for givenness marking. I present a case study of three Slavic languages (Czech, Russian, and Serbo-Croatian) in which givenness is always grammatically marked. In these languages, given elements must linearly precede new elements. If this relative ordering cannot be achieved by base generation, the ordering can be achieved by movement. I offer an account of the data in terms of givenness and the Maximize Presupposition principle of Heim (1991). In particular, I argue for an operator that marks elements in its scope as given. The operator divides the structure between a given and a new part. The role of Maximize Presupposition is to enforce that every given element is in the scope of the operator. The operator and Maximize Presupposition work in tandem with an economy condition on movement that licenses movement only if it yields an otherwise unavailable semantic interpretation. The proposal thus provides independent evidence for competition in grammar and for the role of Maximize Presupposition in the process.}, Author = {Ku\v{c}erov{\'a}, Ivona}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:20:54 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:23:29 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--30}, Title = {Grammatical marking of givenness}, Volume = {20}, Year = {2012}} @article{Schlenker:2011a, Abstract = {Several theories of presupposition projection predict that some sentences which intuitively yield unconditional presuppositions should have weaker, conditional ones. For instance, If John is realistic, he knows that he is incompetent is predicted to have the presupposition that if John is realistic, he is incompetent, whereas one certainly infers that John is in fact incompetent. We summarize some difficulties faced by three solutions, DRT, Singh's `Formal Alternatives', and Singh's `Interacting Alternatives'; we then offer a new analysis which is compatible with several semantic theories of projection, and which does not require the addition of a new representational module. In essence, we obtain unconditional inferences by assuming that speakers may ignore certain parts of a sentence when they accommodate a presupposition---presumably to simplify their computational work. They do so by adding to the context an assumption that would satisfy the presupposition of the sentence no matter which meaning some of its elements have. Depending on which elements are ignored in this way, a variety of strengthened presuppositions are obtained. We speculate on a possible mechanism (which follows some of Singh's earlier ideas) to determine which of these strengthened inferences are in fact obtained. The analysis correctly predicts some new instances of the Proviso Problem in quantificational examples.}, Author = {Schlenker, Philippe}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:18:20 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:19:34 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {395--422}, Title = {The Proviso Problem: a note}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Schlenker:2011, Abstract = {In this note, we reconstruct some results of the DRT analysis of presupposition projection within the theory of local contexts of Schlenker (2009). The latter offered a way to annotate every sentence with variables that denote the various local context sets that play a crucial role in Heim's satisfaction theory (Heim 1983). In standard satisfaction theories, a presupposition must be entailed by its local context. Here we allow a presupposition to be indexed with other local contexts, and we propose, following van der Sandt (1992) and Zeevat (1992), that presuppositions are preferably anaphoric to the highest possible context. The resulting analysis emulates some desirable results of DRT---notably its solution to the `Proviso Problem' (Geurts 1999). But it arguably improves on DRT in some respects: it can generate genuine conditional presuppositions; and it yields more adequate results for some quantified examples. Several limitations of the theory---some of them quite severe---are also discussed.}, Author = {Schlenker, Philippe}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:17:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:17:56 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {373--392}, Title = {{DRT} with local contexts}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Caponigro:2011a, Abstract = {A construction is found in American Sign Language that we call a Question--Answer Clause. It is made of two parts: the first part looks like an interrogative clause conveying a question, while the second part resembles a declarative clause answering that question. The very same signer has to sign both, the entire construction is interpreted as truth-conditionally equivalent to a declarative sentence, and it can be uttered only under certain discourse conditions. These and other properties of Question--Answer Clauses are discussed, and a detailed syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic account is provided. Question--Answer Clauses are argued to be copular clauses consisting of a silent copula of identity connecting an interrogative clause in the precopular position with a declarative clause in the postcopular position. Pragmatically, they instantiate a topic/comment structure, with the first part expressing a sub-question under discussion and the second part expressing the answer to that sub-question. Broader implications of the analysis are discussed for the Question Under Discussion theory of discourse structuring, for the analysis of pseudoclefts in spoken languages, and for recent proposals about the need for answerhood operators and exhaustivity operators in the grammar and the consequences for the syntax/semantics/pragmatics interface.}, Author = {Caponigro, Ivano and Davidson, Kathryn}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:15:27 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:16:39 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {323--371}, Title = {Ask, and tell as well: Question-Answer Clauses in {A}merican {S}ign {L}anguage}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Abrusan:2011, Abstract = {This paper proposes a new explanation for the oddness of presuppositional and negative islands, as well as the puzzling observation that these islands can be obviated by certain quantificational elements. The proposal rests on two independently motivated assumptions: (i) the idea that the domain of manners contains contraries and (ii) the notion that degree expressions range over intervals. It is argued that, given these natural assumptions, presuppositional and negative islands are predicted to lead to a presupposition failure in any context.}, Author = {Abrus{\'a}n, M{\'a}rta}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:13:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:15:02 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {257--321}, Title = {Presuppositional and negative islands: a semantic account}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Lidz:2011, Abstract = {This paper proposes an Interface Transparency Thesis concerning how linguistic meanings are related to the cognitive systems that are used to evaluate sentences for truth/falsity: a declarative sentence S is semantically associated with a canonical procedure for determining whether S is true; while this procedure need not be used as a verification strategy, competent speakers are biased towards strategies that directly reflect canonical specifications of truth conditions. Evidence in favor of this hypothesis comes from a psycholinguistic experiment examining adult judgments concerning `Most of the dots are blue'. This sentence is true if and only if the number of blue dots exceeds the number of nonblue dots. But this leaves unsettled, e.g., how the second cardinality is specified for purposes of understanding and/or verification: via the nonblue things, given a restriction to the dots, as in `|{x: Dot(x) & ~Blue(x)}|'; via the blue things, given the same restriction, and subtraction from the number of dots, as in `|{x: Dot(x)}| -- |{x: Dot(x) & Blue(x)}|'; or in some other way. Psycholinguistic evidence and psychophysical modeling support the second hypothesis.}, Author = {Lidz, Jeffrey and Pietroski, Paul and Halberda, Justin and Hunter, Tim}, Date-Added = {2012-04-01 18:12:08 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-04-01 18:13:20 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {227--256}, Title = {Interface transparency and the psychosemantics of \emph{most}}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Fox:2011, Abstract = {We present an argument for revising the theory of alternatives for Scalar Implicatures and for Association with Focus. We argue that in both cases the alternatives are determined in the same way, as a contextual restriction of the focus value of the sentence, which, in turn, is defined in structure-sensitive terms. We provide evidence that contextual restriction is subject to a constraint that prevents it from discriminating between alternatives when they stand in a particular logical relationship with the assertion or the prejacent, a relationship that we refer to as symmetry. Due to this constraint on contextual restriction, discriminating between alternatives in cases of symmetry becomes the task of focus values. This conclusion is incompatible with standard type-theoretic definitions of focus values, motivating our structure-sensitive definition instead.}, Author = {Fox, Danny and Katzir, Roni}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 20:09:07 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:09:44 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {87--107}, Title = {On the characterization of alternatives}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Morzycki:2011a, Abstract = {This paper offers an analysis of metalinguistic comparatives such as more dumb than crazy in which they differ from ordinary comparatives in the scale on which they compare: ordinary comparatives use scales lexically determined by particular adjectives, but metalinguistic ones use a generally-available scale of imprecision or `pragmatic slack'. To implement this idea, I propose a novel compositional implementation of the Lasersohnian pragmatic-halos account of imprecision---one that represents clusters of similar meanings as Hamblin alternatives. In the theory that results, existential closure over alternatives mediates between alternative-sets and meanings in which imprecision has been resolved. I then articulate a version of this theory in which the alternatives are not related meanings but rather related utterances, departing significantly from Lasersohn's original conception. Although such a theory of imprecision is more clearly `metalinguistic', the evidence for it from metalinguistic comparatives in English is surprisingly limited. The overall picture that emerges is one in which the grammatical distinction between ordinary and metalinguistic comparatives tracks the independently motivated distinction between vagueness and imprecision.}, Author = {Morzycki, Marcin}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 20:07:21 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:08:05 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39--86}, Title = {Metalinguistic comparison in an alternative semantics for imprecision}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Nissenbaum:2011, Abstract = {This paper investigates gaps in degree phrases with too, as in John is too rich [for the monastery to hire ___ ]. We present two curious restrictions on such gapped degree phrases. First, the gaps must ordinarily be anteceded by the subject of the associated gradable adjective. Second, when embedded under intensional verbs, gapped degree phrases are ordinarily restricted to surface scope, unlike their counterparts without gaps. Just as puzzlingly, we show that these restrictions are lifted when there is overt wh-movement in the main clause, revealing a striking similarity between the distribution of gapped degree phrases and so-called parasitic gap constructions. These findings, we argue, suggest that the theory of parasitic gaps needs to accommodate gapped degree phrases. Specifically, they argue that parasitic constituents are null operator structures---and under the right conditions need not be accompanied by matrix wh-movement.}, Author = {Nissenbaum, Jon and Schwarz, Bernhard}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 20:05:39 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:06:44 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--38}, Title = {Parasitic degree phrases}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Ionin:2010, Abstract = {This paper reports on an experimental investigation of the scope of English a indefinites and a certain indefinites. Three experiments test whether native English speakers allow indefinites to scope out of syntactic islands, and to take intermediate as well as widest scope. The experimental findings indicate that a indefinites and a certain indefinites have different ranges of interpretations available to them. Experiment 1 shows that a certain indefinites, unlike a indefinites, cannot be interpreted in the scope of an intensional operator, and further shows that functional readings are available to a certain indefinites but not to a indefinites. Experiment 2 focuses on the availability of long-distance readings of indefinites out of scope islands, and shows that the most accessible reading for a certain indefinites is the widest-scope reading, while the most accessible reading for a indefinites is the narrow-scope reading. Experiment 3 shows that modification of an a indefinite by a relative clause does not facilitate long-distance readings, as long as it does not restrict the domain to a singleton set. Overall, these findings are consistent with the proposal of Schwarz (Proceedings of the Thirteenth Amsterdam Colloquium, ILCC, University of Amsterdam, 192--197, 2001) that a certain indefinites and a indefinites are derived by different semantic mechanisms. The behavior of a certain indefinites is shown to be consistent with the contextually determined choice function approach Kratzer (Events in grammar, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 165--196, 1998) and the singleton indefinite approach Schwarzschild (J Semant 19:289--314, 2002). In contrast, a indefinites are most compatible with a purely quantificational approach, contra much recent theoretical literature. These findings highlight the value of conducting experimental studies testing the predictions of semantic theories.}, Author = {Ionin, Tania}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 20:04:09 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:05:31 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {295--350}, Title = {The scope of indefinites: an experimental investigation}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Arregui:2010, Abstract = {This paper investigates some aspects of the semantics of deontic should-conditionals. The main objective is to understand which actual world facts make deontic statements true. The starting point for the investigation is a famous puzzle known as Chisholm's Paradox. It is important because making sense of the data in Chisholm-style examples involves arriving at some conclusion regarding the interaction between what we consider ideal and what is actually true. I give an account of how facts affect the evaluation of should formulated in a way that does not predict that the divergence between ideals and facts leads to contradictions. The proposed semantics for should and should-conditionals allows for factual detachment without giving rise to paradoxes. The proposal has several parts: a situation-based semantics for the modal should, a view of the propositions embedded under should that allows aspect to play a crucial role in anchoring propositions to the context set, and a proposal for if-clauses that distinguishes between epistemic if-clauses and if-clauses in the scope of should, treating the latter as restrictors on the quantificational domain of the modal.}, Author = {Arregui, Ana}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 20:02:41 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:03:38 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {241--293}, Title = {Detaching \emph{if}-clauses from \emph{should}}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Koontz-Garboden:2010, Abstract = {This paper explores an understudied and poorly understood phenomenon of morphological syncretism in which a morpheme otherwise used to mark the head of a possessive NP appears on words naming property concept (PC) states (states named by adjectives in languages with that lexical category; Dixon, Where have all the adjectives gone? And other essays in Semantics and Syntax, 1982) in predicative and attributive contexts. This phenomenon is found across a variety of unrelated languages. We examine its manifestation in Ulwa, an endangered Misumalpan language of Nicaragua, where diachronic evidence clearly shows that a single affix is involved. We propose an explanation for the syncretism based on an explicit syntactic and semantic analysis of the relevant constructions. On the proposed explanation, the syncretism arises out of a combination of semantic and morphosyntactic facts of Ulwa grammar. Specifically, we propose that the Ulwa pattern exemplifies a possessive strategy of predication. Intuitively, this strategy is a manifestation in grammar of the idiomatic equivalence between the property of being F and the property of having F-ness.}, Author = {Koontz-Garboden, Andrew and Francez, Itamar}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 20:00:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:01:48 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {197--240}, Title = {Possessed properties in {U}lwa}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Kobele:2010, Abstract = {The phenomenon of inverse linking, where a noun phrase embedded within another behaves with respect to binding as though it were structurally independent, has proven challenging for theories of the syntax--semantics interface. In this paper I show that, using an LF-movement style approach to the syntax--semantics interface, we can derive all and only the appropriate meanings for such constructions using no semantic operations other than function application and composition. The solution relies neither on a proliferation of lexical ambiguity nor on abandoning the idea that pronouns denote variables, but rather on a straightforward (and standard) reification of assignment functions, which allows us to define abstraction operators within our models.}, Author = {Kobele, Gregory M.}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:59:35 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 20:00:30 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {183--196}, Title = {Inverse linking via functional composition}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Sassoon:2010, Abstract = {This paper provides a new account of positive versus negative antonyms. The data includes well-known linguistic generalizations regarding negative adjectives, such as their incompatibility with measure phrases (cf. two meters tall/ *short) and ratio phrases (twice as tall/ #short) as well as the impossibility of truly crosspolar comparisons (*Dan is taller than Sam is short). These generalizations admit a variety of exceptions, e.g., positive adjectives that do not license measure phrases (cf. #two degrees warm/cold) and rarely also negative adjectives that do (cf. two hours late/early). Furthermore, new corpus data is presented regarding the use of twice with positive and negative adjectives. The analysis the paper presents supposes that grammar associates gradable adjectives with measure functions---mapping of entities to a set of degrees isomorphic to the real numbers (Kennedy, Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison, 1999). On this analysis, negative adjectives map entities to values that are linearly reversed and linearly transformed in comparison with their values in the positive antonyms. As shown, the generalizations, as well as their exceptions, directly follow. Negative polarity is explained in terms of function reversal, and non-licensing of measure phrases is explained in terms of transformation by an unspecified value.}, Author = {Sassoon, Galit Weidman}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:58:18 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:59:07 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {141--181}, Title = {The degree function of negative adjectives}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Roelofsen:2010, Abstract = {This paper is concerned with constraints on the interpretation of pronominal anaphora, in particular Condition B effects. It aims to contribute to a particular approach, initiated by Reinhart (Anaphora and semantic interpretation, 1983) and further developed elsewhere. It proposes a modification of Reinhart's Interface Rule, and argues that the resulting theory compares favorably with others, while being compatible with independently motivated general hypotheses about the interaction between different interpretive mechanisms.}, Author = {Roelofsen, Floris}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:57:08 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:57:54 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {115--140}, Title = {Condition {B} effects in two simple steps}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Sawada:2011, Abstract = {This paper investigates the semantics of measure phrases in Japanese. Based on new data, we argue that the interpretation of measure phrases in Japanese is sensitive to scale structure such that (i) measure phrases are introduced by a degree morpheme that selects only for gradable predicates whose scale contains a minimal element (i.e., a lower closed scale) and (ii) violations to this restriction are repaired via coercion, which forces a comparative interpretation with a contextually determined standard and hence a minimal element. We compare the Japanese facts to data in other languages and argue that the requirement of having a minimal element is not specific to Japanese, but universal. We show that languages may vary in how they deal with potential violations of this universal constraint, including coercion of a contextually recoverable derived minimal element (Japanese), ungrammaticality (e.g., Spanish, Korean, Russian), and a hybrid system of ungrammaticality for some adjectives and allowed constraint violation for others (e.g., English, German, Italian).}, Author = {Sawada, Osamu and Grano, Thomas}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:55:09 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:56:12 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {191--226}, Title = {Scale structure, coercion, and the interpretation of measure phrases in {J}apanese}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Bale:2011, Abstract = {This paper discusses comparison classes---sets that relativize the interpretation of gradable adjectives, often specified with for-clauses as in John is smart for a linguist. Such a discussion ultimately lends support to the thesis that scales, degrees, measure functions, and linear orders are grammatically derived from more basic relations between individuals. Three accounts of comparison classes are compared and evaluated. The first proposes that such classes serve as an argument to a function that determines a standard of comparison. The second maintains that these classes restrict the domain of a measure function used to map entities to degrees. The third proposes that these classes limit the kind of individuals that participate in a binary relation; this relation is then used in the construction of a scale and a measure function. It is this third account that is most consistent with the empirical data. It can explain how comparison classes fix a standard of comparison, induce presuppositions concerning the comparative subjects, and induce incommensurability in comparative constructions.}, Author = {Bale, Alan Clinton}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:53:56 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:54:36 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {169--190}, Title = {Scales and comparison classes}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Singh:2011, Abstract = {Maximize Presupposition! is an economy condition that adjudicates between contextually equivalent competing structures. Building on data discovered by O. Percus, I will argue that the constraint is checked in the local contexts of embedded constituents. I will argue that this architecture leads to a general solution to the problem of antipresupposition projection, and also allows I. Heim's `Novelty/Familiarity Condition' to be eliminated as a constraint on operations of context change.}, Author = {Singh, Raj}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:52:35 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:53:31 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {149--168}, Title = {Maximize Presupposition! and local contexts}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Gajewski:2011, Abstract = {This paper proposes that both weak and strong NPIs in English are sensitive to the downward entailingness of their licensers. It is also proposed, however, that these two types of NPIs pay attention to different aspects of the meaning of their environment. As observed by von Fintel and Chierchia, weak NPIs do not attend to the scalar implicatures of presuppositions of their licensers. Strong NPIs see both the truth-conditional and non-truth-conditional (scalar implications, presuppositions) meaning of their licensers. This theory accounts for the puzzling inability, noted by Rullmann and Gajewski, of Strawson anti-additive operators to license strong NPIs, as well as for the effects of Zwarts's hierarchy of negative strength. Additional issues concerning comparative quantifiers, few, and proportional quantifiers are addressed.}, Author = {Gajewski, Jon}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:48:41 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:50:20 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {109--148}, Title = {Licensing strong {NPI}s}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2011}} @article{Hacquard:2010, Abstract = {Crosslinguistically, the same modal words can be used to express a wide range of interpretations. This crosslinguistic trend supports a Kratzerian analysis, where each modal has a core lexical entry and where the difference between an epistemic and a root interpretation is contextually determined. A long-standing problem for such a unified account is the equally robust crosslinguistic correlation between a modal's interpretation and its syntactic behavior: epistemics scope high (in particular higher than tense and aspect) and roots low, a fact which has led to proposals that hardwire different syntactic positions for epistemics and roots (cf. Cinque's hierarchy). This paper argues that the range of interpretations a modal receives is even more restricted: a modal must be keyed to certain time-individual pairs, but not others. I show that this can be captured straightforwardly by minimally modifying the Kratzerian account: modals are relative to an event---rather than a world---of evaluation, which readily provides a time (the event's running time) and (an) individual(s) (the event's participants). I propose that this event relativity of modals can in turn explain the correlation between type of interpretation and syntactic position, without stipulation of an interpretation-specific height for modals.}, Author = {Hacquard, Valentine}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:47:28 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:48:08 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {79--114}, Title = {On the event relativity of modal auxiliaries}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Elbourne:2010, Abstract = {This article offers a critical examination of Kroll's (Natural Language Semantics 16: 359--372, 2008) arguments against Elbourne's (Situations and individuals, 2005) treatment of bishop sentences.}, Author = {Elbourne, Paul}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:46:16 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:46:59 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {65--78}, Title = {On bishop sentences}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Menendez-Benito:2010, Abstract = {This paper deals with the interpretation and distribution of universal Free Choice (FC) items, such as English FC any or Spanish cualquiera. Crosslinguistically, universal FC items can be characterized as follows. First, they have a restricted distribution. Second, they express freedom of choice: the sentence You can take any card conveys the information that the addressee is free to pick whichever card she chooses. Under standard assumptions, the truth conditions of sentences like You can take any card are taken to be captured by formalizations in which a universal quantifier ranging over individuals has wide scope over the possibility modal. The crucial observation that informs the account in this paper is that this type of formalization cannot capture the freedom of choice component. I will argue that in order to derive the right interaction between possibility modals and FC items, we need to add an exclusiveness condition to the standard wide scope paraphrases. The same proposal that guarantees freedom of choice will automatically account for the distribution restrictions of FC items. The formal implementation of this proposal is cast in the Hamblin semantics proposed in Kratzer and Shimoyama (Indeterminate phrases: The view from Japanese, 2002).}, Author = {Men{\'e}ndez-Benito, Paula}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:45:06 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:45:48 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {33--64}, Title = {On universal Free Choice items}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Alonso-Ovalle:2010, Abstract = {Across languages, we find indefinites that trigger modal inferences. This article contributes to a semantic typology of these items by contrasting Spanish alg{\'u}n with indefinites like German irgendein or Italian uno qualsiasi. While irgendein-type indefinites trigger a Free Choice effect (Kratzer and Shimoyama 2002; Chierchia 2006), alg{\'u}n simply signals that at least two individuals in its domain are possibilities. Additionally, alg{\'u}n, but not irgendein, can convey that the speaker does not know how many individuals satisfy the existential claim in the world of evaluation. We contend that the two types of indefinites impose different constraints on their domain of quantification: irgendein and its kin are domain wideners (Kratzer and Shimoyama 2002), whereas alg{\'u}n is an `anti-singleton' indefinite (its domain cannot be restricted to a singleton). This, together with the fact that alg{\'u}n does not require uniqueness, allows us to derive the contrast between irgendein and alg{\'u}n by using the pragmatic reasoning presented by Kratzer and Shimoyama.}, Author = {Alonso-Ovalle, Luis and Men{\'e}ndez-Benito, Paula}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:43:29 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:44:25 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--31}, Title = {Modal indefinites}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Abels:2010, Abstract = {The goal of this paper is to propose a unified approach to the split scope readings of negative indefinites, comparative quantifiers, and numerals. There are two main observations that justify this approach. First, split scope shows the same kinds of restrictions across these different quantifiers. Second, split scope always involves low existential force. In our approach, following Sauerland, natural language determiner quantifiers are quantifiers over choice functions, of type <<,t>,t>. In split readings, the quantifier over choice functions scopes above other operators (such as intensional verbs like must or can). Determiner quantifiers leave a choice-function trace when they move and this trace combines with the noun restriction, which is interpreted low. That split scope always involves low existential force is derived, without stipulation, from Kratzer's idea that low existential force can be achieved via binding (into the noun restriction).}, Author = {Abels, Klaus and Mart{\'\i}, Luisa}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:41:34 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:42:22 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {435--470}, Title = {A unified approach to split scope}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Keshet:2010, Abstract = {Researchers often assume that possible worlds and times are represented in the syntax of natural languages. However, it has been noted that such a system can overgenerate. This paper proposes a constraint on systems where worlds and times are represented as situation pronouns. The Intersective Predicate Generalization, based on and extending work by R. Musan, states that two items composed via Predicate Modification, such as a noun and an intersective modifier, must be evaluated in the same world and time. To explain this generalization, a rule of Situation Economy is advanced, which holds that structures must have the fewest number of situation pronouns possible. Since strong DPs require a situation pronoun to receive a de re reading, a restriction on the type of strong determiners is proposed, which supersedes Situation Economy in this case. Finally, the paper shows how the Situation Economy approach explains an unrelated phenomenon involving bare plurals and examines the connection between this new rule and the grammar of natural language in general.}, Author = {Keshet, Ezra}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:39:04 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:39:37 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {385--434}, Title = {Situation economy}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Fintel:2010, Abstract = {It is a recurring matra that epistemic must creates a statement that is weaker than the corresponding flat-footed assertion: It must be raining vs. It's raining. Contrary to classic discussions of the phenomenon such as by Karttunen, Kratzer, and Veltman, we argue that instead of having a weak semantics, must presupposes the presence of an indirect inference or deduction rather than of a direct observation. This is independent of the strength of the claim being made. Epistemic must is therefore quite similar to evidential markers of indirect evidence known from languages with rich evidential systems. We work towards a formalization of the evidential component, relying on a structured model of information states (analogous to some models used in the belief dynamics literature). We explain why in many contexts, one can perceive a lack of confidence on the part of the speaker who uses must.}, Author = {Fintel, Kai von and Gillies, Anthony S.}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:35:55 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:37:04 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {351--383}, Title = {Must{\ldots}stay{\ldots}strong!}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2010}} @article{Siloni:2012, Abstract = {The paper shows that in addition to periphrastic reciprocal constructions and lexical reciprocal verbs, there is a third type---found in Romance and certain Slavic languages---whose reciprocity is not periphrastic but nonetheless composed only in the course of the syntactic derivation. Examining a sample of ten languages, the study reveals and derives the syntactic and semantic properties of these syntactic reciprocal verbs in comparison with their lexical counterparts. It further formulates the precise mechanisms forming the two types. Among other things, the paper devotes considerable attention to the notion ``symmetric verb,'' to the so-called ``I'' reading of embedded reciprocal clauses, and to a particular reciprocal construction that denotes reciprocity between two discontinuous phrases.}, Author = {Siloni, Tal}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:28:42 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:29:22 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {261--320}, Title = {Reciprocal verbs and symmetry}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Li:2012, Abstract = {In this work, we report a new interaction pattern among adverb classes in the context of movement and examine the implications of this pattern with respect to Rizzi's (1990, 2001) Relativized Minimality, Chomsky's (1995) Minimal Link Condition, and Ernst's (2002) Fact-Event Object Calculus. In Sect. 1, we review the relevant data in the literature. Our new contribution is reported in Sect. 2 using wh-movement and four sample adverb classes. Section 3 shows that the pattern holds for various other types of movement as well (neutral preposing, focalization, and clefting in English; scrambling in Russian). We also discuss the behavior of NPs, PPs, and verbal heads here. Section 4 focuses on the theoretical significance of the new facts. In Appendix A, we provide a more comprehensive demonstration of how various adverb classes obey the pattern established in Sects. 2--3. Appendix B is an actual sample of the verbal context we presented to our informants for soliciting subtle data.}, Author = {Li, Yafei and Shields, Rebecca and Lin, Vivian}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:26:59 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:28:34 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {217--260}, Title = {Adverb Classes and the nature of minimality}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Megerdoomian:2012, Abstract = {The nature of preverbal nominals and their relation to the verb have been the focus of much debate in languages with a productive complex predication process. For Persian, certain analyses have argued that the bare nominals in complex predicate constructions are distinct from bare objects, while others have treated the two types of bare nominals uniformly. This paper argues that the two categories of preverbal nouns cannot receive the same analysis since they display distinct syntactic and semantic behavior: the preverbal nominals, unlike the bare object nouns, cannot be questioned, are modified differently, have different interpretations, give rise to distinct case-assignment contexts, and can co-occur with a non-specific object. The distinct properties of the two nominal categories are captured by positing distinct structural positions for these nouns. Non-specific bare nouns are internal arguments of the thematic verb, while the nominal element of the complex predicate construction is part of the verbal domain with which it combines through a process of conflation, as defined in Hale and Keyser (2002), to form a single predicate.}, Author = {Megerdoomian, Karine}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:25:31 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:26:30 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {179--216}, Title = {The status of the nominal in {P}ersian complex predicates}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Koppen:2012, Abstract = {This paper focuses on the question which phi-features are associated with pronouns and how these features are distributed over their internal structure. I argue that pronouns contain Participant and Individuation features (Harley and Ritter 2002). The Participant features and the Individuation features are merged as discrete sets of features which can be targeted for syntactic operations like Agree independently from the other phi-features associated with pronouns. These feature sets are merged and end up on the maximal projection of the pronoun as one feature bundle. The core data of this paper are constituted by Complementizer Agreement (CA) in Dutch dialects (cf. Haegeman 1992; Zwart 1993). In (the mostly West-Germanic) dialects with CA, the subject of an embedded clause agrees with both the finite verb, and with the complementizer introducing the embedded clause. I show that there are two types of CA dialects. In the first type, the complementizer and the finite verb have the same ending. In the second type, the so-called Double Agreement (DA) dialects, however, the complementizer and the finite verb do not have the same affix. What has gone unnoticed in the literature until now is that these two types of CA dialects can be distinguished on the basis of two more properties: CA in the DA dialects is sensitive to (i) extraction of the embedded subject pronoun to a higher clause and (ii) modification of the subject pronoun by a focus particle. I argue that the differences between these two types of CA can be explained if C does not target the same Goal in these dialects. In the DA dialects CA is the result of a Probe agreeing with the Participant features inside the pronominal structure, whereas CA in the other dialects reflects agreement with the top node of this pronominal structure.}, Author = {Koppen, Marjo van}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:22:16 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:24:25 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {135--177}, Title = {The distribution of phi-features in pronouns}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Gouskova:2012, Abstract = {A famous perennial problem in Slavic phonology is yers: vowels that idiosyncratically alternate with zero (e.g., [mox] vs. [mx-a] `moss (nom/gen sg)' alongside [nos] vs. [nos-a] `nose (nom/gen sg)'). The widely accepted analysis of these ``ghost vowels'' is that they must be underlyingly marked as exceptional on a segment-by-segment basis. Moreover, usually they are assumed to be underlyingly representationally defective---either nonmoraic or lacking features (Kenstowicz and Rubach 1987, inter alia). In this paper, I revisit yers from a different perspective. Instead of treating the segments as special, I argue that exceptionality is a property of whole morphemes. This theory of exceptionality has many incarnations (Chomsky and Halle 1968 et seq.), but my version is formalized as Lexically Indexed Constraints in Optimality Theory: in any given language, a universal constraint can be indexed to individual morphemes in the lexicon and ranked in two different positions in the language's hierarchy (Pater 2000, 2006). In Russian, the relevant indexed constraint is *Mid, which penalizes the peripheral mid vowels [e] and [o]. The general, non-indexed constraint is independently needed to explain vowel reduction in unstressed syllables. The indexed version explains why only mid vowels alternate with zero in Russian. This generalization about yer quality is lost in representational accounts, since any vowel can be labeled as nonmoraic underlyingly. Another unsolved mystery about Russian yers is that only vowels in the final syllable of a morpheme can alternate with zero. This requires a phonological explanation---labeling only the alternating vowels as underlyingly special does not address the position problem.}, Author = {Gouskova, Maria}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:21:04 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:24:40 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {79--133}, Title = {Unexceptional segments}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Gonzalez-Vilbazo:2012, Abstract = {Much current work assumes that ``little v'' (henceforth v) is a universal functional category directly involved in the building of predicates. As a functional category, one would expect v to be the locus of parametric variation, as predicted by Hagit Borer's (1984) original hypothesis. Some analyses have shown that v is involved in parametric variation concerning Case (Legate 2008) and probably Object Shift (Chomsky 2001). In this article, we argue that v is also involved in other forms of cross-linguistic variation, thus extending parameter theory in some unexpected directions. In particular, we argue that v is involved in three different features of cross-linguistic variation: the order of verb and complements, their prosodic structure and the expression of focus/background articulation. Our data come from a code-switching variety called Esplugish, part and parcel of the I-language of a community of German/Spanish bilinguals. In Esplugish, as in other code-switching varieties, it is possible to switch between v (L1) and its complement VP/RootP (L2). Surprisingly, we find that the grammatical properties of the VP/RootP are those of L1 and not those of L2, a fact that we account for by arguing that the source of those properties is the v.}, Author = {Gonz{\'a}lez-Vilbazo, and L{\'o}pez, Luis}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:19:18 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:24:09 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {33--77}, Title = {Little v and parametric variation}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Brentari:2012, Abstract = {Sign languages display remarkable crosslinguistic consistencies in the use of handshapes. In particular, handshapes used in classifier predicates display a consistent pattern in finger complexity: classifier handshapes representing objects display more finger complexity than those representing how objects are handled. Here we explore the conditions under which this morphophonological phenomenon arises. In Study 1, we ask whether hearing individuals in Italy and the United States, asked to communicate using only their hands, show the same pattern of finger complexity found in the classifier handshapes of two sign languages: Italian Sign Language (LIS) and American Sign Language (ASL). We find that they do not: gesturers display more finger complexity in handling handshapes than in object handshapes. The morphophonological pattern found in conventional sign languages is therefore not a codified version of the pattern invented by hearing individuals on the spot. In Study 2, we ask whether continued use of gesture as a primary communication system results in a pattern that is more similar to the morphophonological pattern found in conventional sign languages or to the pattern found in gesturers. Homesigners have not acquired a signed or spoken language and instead use a self-generated gesture system to communicate with their hearing family members and friends. We find that homesigners pattern more like signers than like gesturers: their finger complexity in object handshapes is higher than that of gesturers (indeed as high as signers); and their finger complexity in handling handshapes is lower than that of gesturers (but not quite as low as signers). Generally, our findings indicate two markers of the phonologization of handshape in sign languages: increasing finger complexity in object handshapes, and decreasing finger complexity in handling handshapes. These first indicators of phonology appear to be present in individuals developing a gesture system without benefit of a linguistic community. Finally, we propose that iconicity, morphology, and phonology each play an important role in the system of sign language classifiers to create the earliest markers of phonology at the morphophonological interface.}, Author = {Brentari, Diane and Coppola, Marie and Mazzoni, Laura and Goldin-Meadow, Susan}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:17:31 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:25:08 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--31}, Title = {When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners}, Volume = {30}, Year = {2012}} @article{Contini-Morava:2011, Abstract = {Reid (2011) provides an innovative, thoroughly worked out, and rigorously argued alternative to ``agreement'' as an account of verb number marking in English, from a communicative and functionalist perspective. There are some points of contact between his paper and the other contributions to the present issue, but the differences far outweigh the similarities, so the contrasts will be the main focus of this commentary. The similarities include the general topic of ``agreement'' and a distinction between what counts as linguistic knowledge---arbitrary units of grammatical structure---and what counts as extralinguistic, such as information derived from context or knowledge of the world. Differences include the status of the notion of ``agreement'', what counts as data, what counts as an explanation, the theoretical constructs posited and what counts as evidence in support of them, what is meant by ``meaning'', and what kinds of predictions are made.}, Author = {Contini-Morava, Ellen}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:15:27 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:16:29 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {1147--1162}, Title = {And now for something completely different: {R}eid on {E}nglish verb number}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Reid:2011, Abstract = {This paper offers an account of English verb number solely in terms of communicative function. In this account, verb number is a full-fledged expressive device comparable to the number system for English nouns; all instances of verb number are accounted for in terms of meaning, with the caveat that meaning pertains to conceptualization, not reference. Two points emerge from this line of analysis. First, verb number is not controlled by subject number; each is a separate communicative choice governed by discourse-based principles of semantic coherence. Second, even though the subject usually precedes the verb, speakers can nevertheless think ahead and choose subject number so as to accommodate an anticipated choice of verb number just as well as the reverse, and appear to do both on different occasions. Thus, both choices are best understood in terms of symmetrical relations of textual cohesion, usually with each other but sometimes with other features of the context.}, Author = {Reid, Wallis}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:14:14 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:15:04 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {1087--1146}, Title = {The communicative function of {E}nglish verb number}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Franck:2011a, Abstract = {In their paper Reaching Agreement, Bock and Middleton (2011) review a vast array of psycholinguistic experiments on semantic influences in agreement which they argue provide critical empirical evidence to the longstanding debate about the role of meaning in syntax. The authors propose to unify these findings within the Marking and Morphing model, the reference framework for many psycholinguistic studies of agreement production. In this commentary, I discuss four concerns about the approach advocated by Bock and Middleton: (1) the pervasive confusion with respect to the definition of agreement, and its conceptual consequences on the debate about the role of meaning in syntax, (2) the infelicitous comparison between pronouns and verbs providing the empirical foundations of Marking and Morphing, (3) the existence of a set of experimental findings invalidating the assumption of the model with respect to the relation between feature transmission and morphology, (4) the lack of assumptions of Marking and Morphing with respect to the process of feature transmission, hence its inability to account for the structural effects on attraction. In response to these concerns, I present an alternative model, Selection and Copy, and sketch a line of research that explores the workings of the Copy component. I then address the criticisms raised by Bock and Middleton against this research and question the explanatory force of Marking and Morphing as a model of agreement defined as a core syntactic process.}, Author = {Franck, Julie}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:12:47 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:14:06 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {1071--1086}, Title = {Reaching Agreement as a core syntactic process}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Bock:2011, Abstract = {In addition to the major linguistic components of language use, theories of language production must explain how utterances grow out of communicative intentions. In ordinary circumstances, utterances are rooted in meanings. The question addressed in this paper is whether the mechanisms of a core syntactic process, number agreement, depend in any important way on the conceptual underpinnings of number. We critically examine research that points to a role for number semantics in the agreement process, and consider alternative psycholinguistic accounts of agreement in the context of issues about how number meaning infiltrates or informs the structural components of language production.}, Author = {Bock, Kathryn and Middleton, Erica L.}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:11:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:12:45 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {1033--1069}, Title = {Reaching agreement}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Wechsler:2011, Abstract = {In mixed agreement, different agreement targets show different values for the same controller. This paper offers an explanation for the existence of mixed agreement that accounts for the following Polite Plural Generalization: universally, any second person `polite plural' pronouns (e.g. French vous), used honorifically for a single addressee, control syntactic (plural) agreement on all person targets, while non-person-agreeing targets such as predicate adjectives vary across languages, between syntactic and semantic number agreement. Following Wechsler and Zlati{\'c} (The Many Faces of Agreement, CSLI Publications, 2003), person features exist only as features of referential indices (Index phi features), never as grammatical head features of the sort that are involved in adjective-noun concord (Concord phi features). Mixed agreement arises if the `polite plural' or other pronominal controller is underspecified for Concord phi features. But a pronoun has a referential Index, which is necessarily marked with phi features, so any Index agreement targets will appear in the second person plural form. A diachronic explanation is offered for this bifurcation of agreement targets into Index and Concord targets: the former descend from incorporated pronouns while the latter have other sources.}, Author = {Wechsler, Stephen}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:10:13 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:11:05 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {999--1031}, Title = {Mixed agreement, the person feature, and the index/concord distinction}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Bejar:2011, Abstract = {This commentary examines Nevins' Multiple Agree (MA) approach to complex agreement phenomena, and in particular the two patterns that Nevins identifies as omnivorous number and person complementarity. Nevins analyzes both as outcomes of the MA mechanism and attributes the categorical split between person and number to ontological differences in the feature inventories: person features are binary and fully specified, while number features are unary and underspecified. I argue that the opposition between person and number is strained insofar as there exist contexts where person, too, patterns as though it were underspecified, giving rise to the omnivorous agreement pattern. I also show that the MA mechanics do not fully predict that number agreement should be omnivorous across the board. Auxiliary assumptions restricting possible probe structures are required.}, Author = {B{\`e}jar, Susana}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:08:41 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:09:46 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {973--997}, Title = {Remarks on omnivory and complementarity: a commentary on the paper by Andrew Nevins}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Nevins:2011b, Abstract = {This paper capitalizes on the difference between person complementarity (e.g. PCC effects) and omnivorous number (e.g. the fact that a single plural marker can be used to cross-reference more than one plural argument) by proposing that the same syntactic mechanism of Multiple Agree is responsible for both. The widely divergent surface difference results from the fact that person features are fully binary, whereas number features are syntactically privative. Additionally, arguments drawn from a variety of verbal cross-referencing morphemes implicating phi-interactions between subject and object support the claim that these elements are clitics, necessitating a principled morphosyntactic difference between clitics and other DPs undergoing object shift, and revisitation of the clitic-affix distinction.}, Author = {Nevins, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:07:13 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:08:33 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {939--971}, Title = {Multiple agree with clitics: person complementarity vs. omnivorous number}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Preminger:2011, Abstract = {This paper is a commentary on Baker's ``When Agreement is for Number and Gender but not Person''. In many contexts, the behavior of person agreement departs from that of number and/or gender agreement; the central hypothesis advanced by Baker---the Structural Condition on Person Agreement (or SCOPA)---is an attempt to derive these departures from a single, structural condition on the application of person agreement. In this commentary, I explore Basque data that counter-exemplifies SCOPA, as well as a handful of other empirical patterns that SCOPA fails to address, but which I believe should be treated as part of the same empirical landscape. But far from condemning SCOPA, I believe these additional patterns may provide us with hints regarding how SCOPA (with its considerable empirical coverage), as well as its exceptions, are to be derived.}, Author = {Preminger, Omer}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:05:51 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:06:51 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {917--937}, Title = {Asymmetries between person and number in syntax: a commentary on Baker's {SCOPA}}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Baker:2011, Abstract = {In many languages, adjectives agree with a noun phrase in number and gender, but not in person. In others, ditransitive verbs can agree with their theme argument in number and gender, but not in person (the Person Case Constraint). However, a unified account of these two similar patterns has rarely been attempted. In this article, I review how a single syntactic principle from Baker (2008)---the Structural Condition on Person Agreement (SCOPA)---can explain both phenomena, in contrast to other existing proposals. I then go on to show how the SCOPA also accounts for five other environments in which verbs agree in number and gender (if relevant) but not in person. Special attention is given to two entirely new cases: subject raising constructions in Sakha and agreement with direct objects in Ostyak. Along the way, I also discuss the consequences of partial agreement for case assignment, using this to explain why non-SCOPA-compliant configurations sometimes result in legitimate partial agreement with a first or second person pronoun, and sometimes result in a structure being ineffable.}, Author = {Baker, Mark C.}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:04:43 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:05:27 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {875--915}, Title = {When agreement is for number and gender but not person}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Dikken:2011, Abstract = {The linguistic literature abounds with discussions of phi-feature inflection. The formalist tradition has, in a variety of ways, approached this phenomenon predominantly in terms of an agreement relationship between two terms of a syntactic structure---for instance, the subject and the finite verb (typically showing agreement for person and number), or the object and a past participle (which, e.g. in the Romance languages, may agree for number and gender, but not for person). But not all these agreement relationships affect all phi-features equally, which raises the question of whether there is to be a unified approach to phi-features in general. And two terms that can entertain an agreement relationship for certain phi-features do not seem to engage in such agreement every time they might be expected to so do. On the surface, plural subjects can co-occur with singularly inflected finite verbs, and vice versa; and sometimes a subpart of the subject seems to control the selection of the inflection on the finite verb, in so-called `attraction' cases. These kinds of phenomena give rise to an in-depth exploration of the nature and reality of agreement relationships, including the possibility of an analysis treating phi-featural properties as autonomous vis-{\`a}-vis one another, assigned to each term separately, not under agreement. This special issue brings together a collection of papers and commentaries reflecting on these matters in various ways. In this introduction, I set the stage for the discussion to follow.}, Author = {Dikken, Marcel den}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:03:19 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:04:41 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {857--874}, Title = {Phi-feature inflection and agreement: An Introduction}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Meltzer-Asscher:2011, Abstract = {This article focuses on Hebrew adjectival passives, showing that, as was claimed for other languages, the class of adjectival passives in Hebrew is not homogenous, but rather consists of two sub-classes. Former attempts to capture the non-homogenous nature of the class of adjectival passives in different languages relied mainly on the existence versus absence of an event in their interpretation. In contrast, I argue that the criterion distinguishing the two sub-classes of adjectival passives in Hebrew is the presence versus absence of an implicit Agent or Cause argument. Thus, the split parallels a very well-known split in the verbal system---that between passive and unaccusative verbs. Once this parallelism between the adjectival and the verbal systems is recognized, it is possible to claim that the same valence-changing processes (namely, saturation and decausativization) are operative in both systems. This assumption can predict the syntactic and semantic behavior of the two sub-classes of adjectives, as well as their composition, without resorting to operations unique to adjectival passive formation.}, Author = {Meltzer-Asscher, Aya}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:01:37 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:03:06 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {815--855}, Title = {Adjectival passives in {H}ebrew: evidence for parallelism between the adjectival and verbal systems}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Landau:2011, Abstract = {Copy raising sentences (Charlie looks like his prospects are bright) are ambiguous between a thematic and a nonthematic reading for the subject, corresponding to whether or not it is the perceptual source. On the basis of Hebrew and English data, this paper motivates a novel generalization: a pronominal copy in the complement is necessary if and only if the matrix subject is not thematic. This follows if (i) a nonthematic DP must be licensed by predication, (ii) the clausal complement is turned into a predicate by merging with a null operator, and (iii) the pronominal copy is the variable required by the operator. Contra previous analyses, I argue that the complement in copy raising may be propositional, forming an ``aboutness'' relation with the subject. When it is predicative, however, a null operator is necessary, since CPs are not natural predicates. The dichotomy between propositional and predicative CPs cuts across the gap/copy distinction, and is manifested in other constructions, also discussed (hanging topic vs. left dislocation, rationale vs. purpose clauses, and proleptic object constructions).}, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 19:00:34 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:01:34 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {779--813}, Title = {Predication vs. aboutness in copy raising}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Ko:2011, Abstract = {This paper investigates the properties of syntactic edges, with special attention being paid to two central issues in cyclic syntax: the domain and the nature of cyclicity. This paper argues for the premise that predication domains form a Spell-out domain, and that Spell-out results in order preservation of the predication domain. It is shown that elements externally merged at the edge of a predication domain observe a special ordering restriction, the Edge Generalization. The ordering restriction is explained by the interaction of two premises of cyclic syntax, coupled with a theory of probe-goal Search. Empirical evidence for the proposal comes from various sub-extraction phenomena out of edges of predication domains in Korean and Japanese. In particular, the interactions between floating numeral quantifier constructions and (primary and secondary) predication constructions are closely examined. The current proposal poses some interesting challenges to the proposition-based-phase system: it argues against the claim that only strong phases undergo Spell-out, and that edges are spelled out separately from the complement. The proposal also has some implications for the structure and typology of resultative and depictive predicates, and for the finer-grained structure of VP including aspectual adverbs and small clause complements.}, Author = {Ko, Heejeong}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:59:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 19:00:26 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {725--778}, Title = {Predication and edge effects}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kawahara:2011, Abstract = {In Japanese loanword phonology, geminates optionally devoice when there is another voiced obstruent within the same stem, i.e., geminates may optionally devoice when they violate OCP(voice). This devoicing of OCP-violating geminates has received much attention in the recent phonological literature. However, the debates centering around this phenomenon have relied primarily on intuition-based data, and no systematic judgment experiments have been performed. This paper fills that gap. The experiment reported in this paper shows that Japanese speakers do find devoicing of geminates natural when there is another voiced stop within the same word, i.e., when the geminates violate OCP(voice). The experiment moreover finds other interesting aspects of devoicing: (i) the naturalness of devoicing of OCP-violating geminates correlates positively with the lexical frequencies of the words in question, (ii) the naturalness of devoicing of OCP-violating geminates is not significantly affected by place of articulation, (iii) speakers find (context-free) devoicing of geminates more natural than devoicing of OCP-violating singletons, and (iv) speakers find the devoicing of OCP-violating singletons more natural in word-medial position than in word-initial position.}, Author = {Kawahara, Shigeto}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:57:52 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:58:38 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {705--723}, Title = {Japanese loanword devoicing revisited: a rating study}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Horvath:2011, Abstract = {The paper divides verbal alternations which, broadly speaking, involve the cognitive notion of Causation into (i) causativization, (ii) decausativization. The latter operation is identical across languages and applies universally in the lexicon. The former is argued to be lexical in some languages; in others, causative verbs are built in the syntax by means of a Cause predicate and an embedded one. The study presents novel empirical evidence, identifies and derives the various clusters of properties associated with the alternations, and formulates the precise mechanisms underlying them. The empirical array is drawn mainly from Hungarian and Japanese. The findings have direct implications for alternative conceptions of the division of labor between the syntax and the lexicon.}, Author = {Horvath, Julia and Siloni, Tal}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:56:35 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:57:25 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {657--704}, Title = {Causatives across components}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Giannakidou:2011, Abstract = {In this paper, we present a striking parallel between Greek and Korean in the formation and interpretation of metalinguistic comparatives. The initial observation is that both languages show an empirical contrast between ordinary and metalinguistic comparatives realized in two places: (a) in the form of a designated metalinguistic comparative MORE, and (b) in the form of THAN employed. We propose (building on earlier ideas in Giannakidou and Stavrou 2009; Giannakidou and Yoon 2009) that the metalinguistic comparative is subjective and attitudinal, i.e. it introduces the point of view of an individual towards a sentence---and argue that the individual expresses invariably an attitude of preference: she prefers one sentence (the sentence itself, or the proposition it expresses) in a given context over another. The preference may come out as completely negative in certain cases, and this is manifested as yet another MORE lexicalization in Korean (charari), which selects nuni-THAN, which itself carries a negative expressive index (in the sense of Potts 2007b), we will claim. Expressive negativity is not equivalent to negation in syntax, as nuni alone cannot license NPIs that need negation. If our analysis is correct, it has one important implication that goes beyond just the metalinguistic comparatives in the individual languages we are considering. It allows the generalization that metalinguistic functions in language are indeed part of the grammar. In particular, they are reflexes of grammaticalization of perspective and subjective mode, on a par with predicates of personal taste discussed by Lasersohn (2005, 2008, 2009), mood choice, and similar phenomena. In comparatives, subjective mode is manifested as an attitude of preference, with possible addition of expressive meaning.}, Author = {Giannakidou, Anastasia and Yoon, Suwon}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:54:46 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:56:33 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {621--655}, Title = {The subjective mode of comparison: Metalinguistic comparatives in {G}reek and {K}orean}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Bhatt:2011, Abstract = {Degree heads combine with individual (John is taller than [Mary]) as well as clausal arguments (John is taller than [Mary is]). Does the degree head have the same meaning in these two argument structures? Two kinds of answers have been proposed in the literature: I. there is a single meaning where the 2-place degree head combines with a degree predicate, with a reduction operation that derives the DP argument from a degree predicate denoting clausal argument, and II. there are distinct meanings for each argument structure, one combining with an individual denoting DP (3-place degree head) and the other with a degree predicate denoting clause (2-place degree head). We show that languages vary in which of these answers they choose: English goes for option I and Hindi-Urdu and Japanese for versions of option II. Our account of this variation assumes that the crosslinguistic distribution of 2-place and 3-place degree heads is not in itself subject to crosslinguistic parametrization; they are just syntactic projections of the basic meaning of comparison. We advance a specific proposal which derives the differences between the languages from the morphosyntactic properties of `than' and a preference for minimal structure.}, Author = {Bhatt, Rajesh and Takahashi, Shoichi}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:53:29 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:54:18 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {581--620}, Title = {Reduced and unreduced phrasal comparatives}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Zimmermann:2011, Abstract = {Recent optimality-theoretic analyses of fixed segmentism reduplication and root-and-pattern morphology invoke a technique of overwriting: Phonotactic constraints prevent the cooccurrence of an affix with the unmodified reduplicant or base word, and the resulting conflict is resolved by replacing part of the lexical material with the affix (Ussishkin 1999; Alderete et al. 1999). Nevins (2005) claims that this type of approach both overgenerates and undergenerates since it predicts unattested overwriting patterns, and cannot account for specific phenomena in Hebrew and Hindi. In this paper, we show that a substantial part of the overgeneration argument is empirically flawed, and argue that all remaining problems find a straightforward solution in the independently motivated parametrization of optimality-theoretic constraints and a general metacondition on possible constraint rankings.}, Author = {Zimmermann, Eva and Trommer, Jochen}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:46:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:47:07 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {561--580}, Title = {Overwriting as optimization}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Smith:2011, Abstract = {Evidence from the intonation of wh questions in the Fukuoka dialect of Japanese is used to explore a recent proposal by Richards that the syntax-prosody interface includes a requirement for wh elements and their associated complementizers to be contained in the same phonological phrase. An examination of multiple wh questions and nested wh questions determines that this phrasing requirement originates with the complementizer, not with the wh element.}, Author = {Smith, Jennifer}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:44:57 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:45:46 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {545--559}, Title = {[+wh] complementizers drive phonological phrasing in {F}ukuoka {J}apanese}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Sandler:2011, Abstract = {The division of linguistic structure into a meaningless (phonological) level and a meaningful level of morphemes and words is considered a basic design feature of human language. Although established sign languages, like spoken languages, have been shown to be characterized by this bifurcation, no information has been available about the way in which such structure arises. We report here on a newly emerging sign language, Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language, which functions as a full language but in which a phonological level of structure has not yet emerged. Early indications of formal regularities provide clues to the way in which phonological structure may develop over time.}, Author = {Sandler, Wendy and Aronoff, Mark and Meir, Irit}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:43:32 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:44:20 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {503--543}, Title = {The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Marin:2011, Abstract = {In this paper, we argue that by making a careful distinction between the notions of inchoativity and telicity, we can gain new insight into how changes of state can be expressed in natural language. Our argument is based on an analysis of Spanish reflexive psychological verbs (SRPVs) such as aburrirse `to be/become bored' and enfadarse `to become angry.' We present diagnostics that clearly support the claim that while these verbs are inchoative, they are not telic, nor do they denote changes of state. Additional tests indicate that these verbs are not dynamic, either; however, we show that they lack dynamicity for different reasons: aburrirse verbs, because they are stative; enfadarse verbs, because they denote truly punctual eventualities. We present a formal semantic analysis using the event ontology proposed in Pi{\~n}{\'o}n (1997). This analysis allows us to capture very naturally the similarities and differences between the two subclasses of SRPVs, to characterize their inchoativity, and to distinguish it from telicity. In addition, it supports a view of the Vendlerian aspectual classes on which the achievement class describes truly punctual eventualities and excludes certain predicates commonly (if not universally) assumed to belong to this class, such as the so-called degree achievement verbs.}, Author = {Mar{\'\i}n, Rafael and McNally, Louise}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:42:02 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:43:02 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {467--502}, Title = {Inchoativity, change of state, and telicity: evidence from {S}panish reflexive psychological verbs}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kimper:2011, Abstract = {This paper explores the consequences of Harmonic Serialism (HS), a derivational variant of OT, for local and global phonological variation. Variation is local when each locus within a single form may vary independently, as in French schwa deletion. Variation is global when all loci within a single form must covary, as in labial (de)voicing in Warao. Within the framework of Optimality Theory (OT) with parallel evaluation, only global variation is predicted to exist. In this paper, I show how implementing a multiple-rankings theory of phonological variation within HS accounts for both local and global variation.}, Author = {Kimper, Wendell A.}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:40:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:41:05 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {423--465}, Title = {Locality and globality in phonological variation}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Corver:2011, Abstract = {Two strategies of NP-ellipsis have been identified in the literature: (a) the elision strategy, and (b) the pronominalization strategy. The former has been said to be dependent on the presence of inflectional morphology (i.e., agreement) on the adjectival remnant. The latter strategy is used when the adjectival remnant does not carry any inflectional morphology. The aim of this article is to show that there are languages, among which Dutch, where morphological agreement appears to be the licensing factor, but where one-insertion (i.e., the pronominalization strategy) is the actual strategy. We arrive at this conclusion via an in-depth and systematic micro-comparative investigation of NPE in a number of closely related languages and dialects, more specifically: Afrikaans, Frisian, (standard) Dutch and dialectal variants of Dutch. English will be included in our analysis as well, since it is a core example of the pronominalization (i.e., one insertion) strategy. At a more theoretical level, it will be shown on the basis of close inspection of our micro-variation data that the pro-nouns involved in the pronominalization strategy have a composite structure. It will be shown that this decompositional analysis of pro-nouns brings together (i.e., unifies) the elision strategy and the pronominalization strategy. Another outcome of our study will be that languages/dialects may have available more than one NPE strategy.}, Author = {Corver, Norbert and Koppen, Marjo van}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:34:54 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:36:03 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {371--421}, Title = {{NP}-ellipsis with adjectival remnants: a micro-comparative perspective}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Beavers:2011, Abstract = {Affectedness---usually construed as a persistent change in or impingement of an event participant---has been implicated in argument realization, lexical aspect, transitivity, and various syntactic operations. However, it is rarely given a precise, independently-motivated definition. Rather, it is often defined intuitively or diacritically, or reduced to the properties it is meant to explain, especially lexical aspect. I propose a semantic analysis of affectedness as a relationship between a theme participant that undergoes a change and a scale participant that measures the change (following Beavers 2008a, 2009 and Kennedy and Levin 2008). I justify this analysis by re-examining the empirical diagnostics for affectedness, and argue that affectedness is not reducible to lexical aspect, but is tightly correlated with it in a way that motivates an analysis involving two interdependent participants. This model also provides a precise way of defining the pervasive notion of degrees of affectedness, as a hierarchy of monotonically weakening truth conditions about the result state of the theme on the scale. This hierarchy further captures important subset relations among predicates regarding affectedness diagnostics, and ultimately brings together many of the above phenomena under a single, unified approach.}, Author = {Beavers, John}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:33:36 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:34:20 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {335--370}, Title = {On affectedness}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Truswell:2011, Abstract = {I describe a type of relative clause found in 16th--19th century English. This construction, the Relative with a Leftward Island or RLI, is characterised by a cluster of unusual properties. The relative pronoun is a definite, anaphoric pronoun, apparently semantically identical to that found in regular English appositive relatives, but the syntactic structure containing that pronoun is quite distinct from that of regular relative clauses. RLIs are biclausal structures, syntactically independent of the antecedent of the relative pronoun, with the first clause left-adjoined to the second. The relative pronoun occurs at the left edge of the subordinate, left-adjoined clause. I provide a synchronic analysis of this construction, and a sketch of the diachrony of relative clauses around this time, a period in which many constructions emerged, spread to some extent, and then disappeared within a century or so, without ever becoming fully widespread. The analysis offered here touches on many areas of syntactic theory, including island pied-piping, null subjects in non-pro-drop languages, resumption, the distribution of adjoined positions, and properties of movement and binding.}, Author = {Truswell, Robert}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:31:37 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:32:27 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {291--332}, Title = {Relatives with a Leftward Island in {E}arly {M}odern {E}nglish}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Jesney:2011, Abstract = {In the Optimality-Theoretic learnability and acquisition literature it has been proposed that certain classes of constraints must be biased toward particular rankings (e.g., Markedness ≫ IO-Faithfulness; Specific IO-Faithfulness ≫ General IO-Faithfulness). While sometimes difficult to implement efficiently or comprehensively, these biases are necessary to explain how learners acquire the most restrictive grammar consistent with positive evidence from the target language, and how innovative patterns emerge during the course of child phonological development. This paper demonstrates that altering the mode of constraint interaction from strict ranking as in Optimality Theory to additive weighting as in Harmonic Grammar (HG) reduces the number of classes of constraints that must be distinguished by such biases. Using weighted constraints and a version of the Gradual Learning Algorithm (GLA), the only distinction needed is between Output-based constraints, which must be biased toward high weights, and Input-Output-based constraints, which must be biased toward the lowest weights possible. We implement this distinction within the HG-GLA model by assigning different initial weights and plasticity values to the two classes of constraints. This implementation suffices to ensure that restrictive grammars are learned, and also predicts the emergence of a variety of attested intermediate stages during the course of acquisition.}, Author = {Jesney, Karen and Tessier, Anne-Michelle}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:29:36 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:30:50 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {251--290}, Title = {Biases in {H}armonic {G}rammar: the road to restrictive learning}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Jenks:2011, Abstract = {This paper presents a description and analysis of the tonal system of Moro, a Kordofanian language of Sudan, showing that the distribution of H(igh) tone is sensitive to a number of morphological and prosodic factors. First, we demonstrate that the distribution of H on nouns is sensitive to the OCP, both within roots and with affixes. Nouns also exhibit lexical distinctions between forms that exhibit unbounded rightward spreading of H and those that show no spreading. We model this distinction using cophonologies. While the distribution of H on Moro verb stems bears some similarities to nouns, crucial differences emerge. Rightward H tone spreading is binary on verbs, and sensitive to the weight of the syllable in terms of both the presence of an onset and a coda. We model this effect as H tone spreading within a binary foot. Furthermore, unlike nouns, underlying representations play little role in the distribution of H on verb roots. H tone is predictably distributed within a morphological category, the derived stem (D-stem), similar to a constituent recognized in Bantu languages (e.g. Downing 2000). Finally, we analyze competition between H associated with the D-stem and H associated with affixes. This H tone competition is an OCP-driven effect occurring within the macrostem.}, Author = {Jenks, Peter and Rose, Sharon}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:27:43 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:29:26 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {211--250}, Title = {High tone in {M}oro: effects of prosodic categories and morphological domains}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Fanselow:2011, Abstract = {In Czech, German, and many other languages, part of the semantic focus of the utterance can be moved to the left periphery of the clause. The main generalization is that only the leftmost accented part of the semantic focus can be moved. We propose that movement to the left periphery is generally triggered by an unspecific edge feature of C (Chomsky 2008) and its restrictions can be attributed to requirements of cyclic linearization, modifying the theory of cyclic linearization developed by Fox and Pesetsky (2005). The crucial assumption is that structural accent is a direct consequence of being linearized at merge, thus it is indirectly relevant for (locality restrictions on) movement. The absence of structural accent correlates with givenness. Given elements may later receive (topic or contrastive) accents, which accounts for fronting in multiple focus/contrastive topic constructions. Without any additional assumptions, the model can account for movement of pragmatically unmarked elements to the left periphery (`formal fronting', Frey 2005). Crucially, the analysis makes no reference at all to concepts of information structure in the syntax, in line with the claim of Chomsky (2008) that UG specifies no direct link between syntax and information structure.}, Author = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Lenertov{\'a}, Denisa}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:25:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:27:01 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {169--209}, Title = {Left peripheral focus: mismatches between syntax and information structure}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Dayal:2011, Abstract = {This paper argues that Hindi incorporation is, in fact, pseudo-incorporation, involving noun phrases rather than nouns. Furthermore, it shows that there is no requirement that the incorporated nominal surface as a morphological or even a syntactic unit with the verb. Such loosely aligned nominals can nevertheless be identified as incorporation on the basis of semantic intuitions having to do with number interpretation, anaphora, and certain properties typically associated with lexical processes. Contrary to standard assumptions, it is argued that the target of pseudo-incorporation is specified for number. Singular incorporated nominals in Hindi are shown to be semantically singular, with number neutrality arising as a consequence of interaction with aspectual operators. Taking aspectual information into account is also shown to have interesting implications for current approaches to the semantics of incorporation, one in which the incorporated nominal introduces a discourse referent, and one in which it functions as a predicate modifier. A closer look at the effect of aspect on anaphora, for example, does not unequivocally support the predicate modification view of pseudo-incorporation. The paper draws on data from Hungarian, and to some extent Danish, to explore the cross-linguistic applicability of the claims made on the basis of Hindi. Most notably, a distinction between Hungarian verbs with respect to incorporation of bare singulars provides striking confirmation of the claim that number morphology is semantically visible in pseudo-incorporation. It also addresses restrictions on the productivity of pseudo-incorporation in light of the proposed analysis of pseudo-incorporation.}, Author = {Dayal, Veneeta}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:23:37 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:24:23 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {123--167}, Title = {Hindi Pseudo-incorporation}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Caponigro:2011, Abstract = {Abstract This paper documents and analyzes the pattern used in the Northwest Caucasian language Adyghe (Circassian) to express what the following five different constructions convey in other languages: headed and headless relative clauses, embed- ded declaratives, embedded polar interrogatives, and embedded constituent interrog- atives. We argue that Adyghe encodes the meanings of all these embedded structures by means of the same syntactic construction, a relative clause. This pervasive use of relative clauses is possible due to mechanisms that are independently attested not just in Adyghe but also in more familiar languages like English. These mechanisms include concealed questions, polarity operators, and nominals such as fact and question that can connect propositional attitude verbs or interrogative verbs with embedded clauses. We suggest that this extensive use of relative clauses in Adyghe is triggered by the absence of non-relative complementizer. We further show that this use is facilitated by their morphological visibility: a relativizer realized as a prefix on the verb, verbal affixation, a rich system of applicative heads hosting indirect arguments, and the availability of a case marker suffixed to headless relatives. We conclude by discussing the implications of the Adyghe system for the general design of embedding and subordination in natural language.}, Author = {Caponigro, Ivano and Polinsky, Maria}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:20:46 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:21:53 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {71--122}, Title = {Relative embeddings: A {C}ircassian puzzle for the syntax/semantics interface}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Brasoveanu:2011, Abstract = {Understanding a linguistic theory within OT requires an exact character- ization of the ranking conditions necessitated by data. These conditions determine the formal shape of the grammar while providing the crucial link between the data and its interpretation. We introduce an algorithm (`Fusional Reduction', FRed) which calculates the necessary and sufficient ranking conditions inherent in any collection of candidates and presents them in a maximally concise and informative way. The algorithm, stemming from the original proposal of Brasoveanu 2003, is set within the fusional ERC theory of Prince 2002a. In this context, the Most Informative Basis and the Skeletal Basis emerge as the two important types of reduced repre- sentations of ranking structure. We examine their properties and show how FRed produces them from data. Fine-grained FRed is compared with broad-stroke RCD (Tesar and Smolensky 1993, Tesar 1995 et seq.), and RCD is reinterpreted and em- braced within FRed as a simplified, information-losing sub-case. Finally, FRed is compared with other related algorithms in structure, worst-case complexity, and rel- evance to the analytical enterprise. This paper revises Brasoveanu and Prince 2005, 2007; Prince and Brasoveanu 2010 gives a more formal perspective, with proof of the theorems.}, Author = {Brasoveanu, Adrian and Prince, Alan}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:19:10 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:20:03 +0000}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--70}, Title = {Ranking and necessity: The Fusional Reduction Algorithm}, Volume = {29}, Year = {2011}} @article{Pirvulescu:2012, Abstract = {In French, the acquisition of object clitics seems delayed, and omissions are documented. In this article, we look at the experimental paradigm traditionally used to elicit object clitics and propose a new elicitation procedure that is closer to how clitics are produced in spontaneous production. We show that under the proposed new experiment, the results in elicited production align with those in spontaneous production, and omission of object clitics is minimal. We briefly outline the implications for the analysis of the omission phenomenon.}, Author = {Pirvulescu, Mihaela and Hill, Virginia}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:11:46 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:12:46 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {73--81}, Title = {Object Clitic Omission in {F}rench-Speaking Children: Effects of the Elicitation Task}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2012}} @article{Anderssen:2012, Abstract = {This article investigates the acquisition of object shift in Norwegian child language. We show that object shift is complex derivationally, distributionally, and referentially, and propose a new analysis in terms of IP-internal topicalization. The results of an elicited production study with 27 monolingual Norwegian-speaking children (ages 4;05--7;00) reveal a prolonged delay in the acquisition of object shift with topical individuated pronominal objects. At the same time, we observe target-like placement and prosodic marking of contrastive, possessive, and indefinite pronouns, which do not shift. In our account of the observed delay we refer to the complexity models proposed by Yang (2002, 2004, 2005, 2010) and Hudson Kam & Newport (2005, 2009). In light of Yang's productivity model we argue that not shifting object pronouns is the rule, and OS is the exception. In light of Hudson Kam & Newport's approach to complexity, we argue that the children perceive OS as an inconsistent operation.}, Author = {Anderssen, Merete and Bentzen, Kristine and Rodina, Yulia}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:09:28 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:10:56 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39--72}, Title = {Topicality and Complexity in the Acquisition of {N}orwegian Object Shift}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2012}} @article{Shin:2012, Abstract = {To investigate the development of the NP selection process, preferences for overt or null Spanish subject pronouns were elicited from 139 children (5;09 to 15;08) and 30 adults in Mexico. Partici- pants were told stories in which consecutive grammatical subjects shared the same referent (same- reference), or did not (switch-reference). In the stories, overt pronouns in same-reference were redundant, and null pronouns in switch-reference rendered reference ambiguous. Adult participants preferred null pronouns in same-reference contexts and overt pronouns in switch-reference contexts, demonstrating an avoidance of redundancy and ambiguity. Children demonstrated a tolerance for redundancy well into adolescence. A tolerance for ambiguous reference declined at age eight/nine and then progressively decreased with age. We interpret the tolerance for ambiguity as an indication that children have difficulty with perspective taking when faced with complex structures and tasks.}, Author = {Shin, Naomi Lapidus and Cairns, Helen Smith}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:07:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:08:46 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--38}, Title = {The Development of {NP} Selection in School-Age Children: Reference and {S}panish Subject Pronouns}, Volume = {19}, Year = {2012}} @article{Ettlinger:2011, Abstract = {The correct use of an affix, such as the English plural suffix, may reflect mastery of a morphological process, but it may also depend on children's syntactic, semantic, and phonological abilities. The present article reports a set of experiments in support of this latter view, specifically focusing on the importance of the phonological make-up of plural forms for both production and comprehension. In Experiments 1 and 2, plural productions were elicited from 80 two-year-old children for nouns with codas with varying phonological properties. The results provide evidence that production of the plural morpheme is partly governed by the complexity of the coda and its sonority. Experiments 3 and 4 show that these constraints on codas hold for comprehension as well, suggesting that this effect is not simply articulatory, but also impacts the morphophonology of the plural.}, Author = {Ettlinger, Marc and Zapf, Jennifer}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:05:29 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:06:26 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {294--313}, Title = {The Role of Phonology in Children's Acquisition of the Plural}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Berent:2011, Abstract = {Across languages, onsets with large sonority distances are preferred to those with smaller distances (e.g., bw>bd>lb; Greenberg 1978). Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 2004) attributes such facts to grammatical restrictions that are universally active in all grammars. To test this hypothesis, here we examine whether children extend putatively universal sonority restrictions to onsets unattested in their language. Participants (M D 4;03) were presented with pairs of auditory words---either identical (e.g., lbif!lbif) or epenthetically related (e.g., lbif!lebif)---and asked to judge their identity. Results showed that, like adults, children's ability to detect epenthetic distortions was monotonically related to sonority distance (bw>bd>lb), and their performance was inexplicable by several statistical and phonetic factors. These findings suggest that sonority restrictions are active in early childhood, and their scope is broad.}, Author = {Berent, Iris and Harder, Katherine and Lennertz, Tracy}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:03:25 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:04:37 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {281--293}, Title = {Phonological Universals in Early Childhood: Evidence from Sonority Restrictions}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Ionin:2011, Abstract = {English uses three types of generic NPs: bare plurals (Lions are dangerous), definite singulars (The lion is dangerous), and indefinite singulars (A lion is dangerous). These three NP types are not interchangeable: definite singulars and bare plurals can have generic reference at the NP- level, while indefinite singulars are compatible only with sentence-level genericity. This study investigates whether L1-Russian and L1-Korean L2-English learners, whose article-less L1s do not morphologically encode the distinction between the two types of genericity, can distinguish between the different types of English generics. The results of a written acceptability judgment task with intermediate/advanced L2-learners showed that the learners exhibited sensitivity to the two types of genericity. They were target-like on their interpretation of bare plural and indefinite singular generics, but had not acquired the interpretation of definite singular generics. Theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.}, Author = {Ionin, Tania and Montrul, Silvina and Kim, Ji-Hye and Philippov, Vadim}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 18:00:40 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 18:02:17 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {242--280}, Title = {Genericity Distinctions and the Interpretation of Determiners in Second Language Acquisition}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Zukowski:2011, Abstract = {Previous research has suggested that very young children learning English adhere quite rigidly to a grammatical constraint on the possible contexts for contraction of want and to into the reduced form wanna. Two elicited production studies reported here suggest that young children do produce wanna in illicit contexts. One study identifies one factor that offers a partial explanation for the conflicting results, but this factor alone does not completely explain the earlier nearly categorical results observed for children. Our findings cast doubt on the claim that children have innate knowledge of a categorical constraint against contraction over a trace or of any absolute constraint on the occurrence of wanna, and highlight the need for further developmental work.}, Author = {Zukowski, Andrea and Larsen, Jaiva}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:58:34 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:59:52 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {211--241}, Title = {Wanna Contraction in Children: Retesting and Revising the Developmental Facts}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Gutierrez-Mangado:2011, Abstract = {The investigation of the comprehension of L1 relative clauses across different languages has shown that subject relatives (SRs) are acquired earlier and responded to more accurately than object relatives (ORs). Most of this work has been based on SVO nominative-absolutive languages. In this article we present the results obtained in a binary picture-sentence matching task from L1 Basque, a highly inflected, ergative-absolutive, SOV language with prenominal relatives. The results obtained reveal that in Basque, ORs are responded to more accurately than SRs, which indicates that children do not comprehend SRs with more accuracy universally. The results are discussed in the light of different hypotheses put forward in the literature in order to account for the previously observed SR preference.}, Author = {Gutierrez-Mangado, M. Juncal}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:55:39 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:56:48 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {176--201}, Title = {Children's Comprehension of Relative Clauses in an Ergative Language: The Case of {B}asque}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Grebenyova:2011, Abstract = {This article presents the results of four studies exploring the acquisition of the language-specific syntactic and semantic properties of multiple interrogatives in English, Russian, and Malayalam, languages that behave differently with respect to the syntax and semantics of multiple interrogatives. A corpus analysis investigated the frequency of occurrence of multiple interrogatives in parental speech, demonstrating that children face quite limited evidence in the input. It was followed with studies where multiple interrogatives were elicited from children and adults in specific contexts in English, Russian, and Malayalam. Children acquiring English and Malayalam demonstrated perfect knowledge of the properties of multiple questions, while Russian-acquiring children exhibited some difficulties with the language-specific syntax of these expressions. The learning process of multiple interrogatives is explored, considering several sources of evidence children are getting in the input.}, Author = {Grebenyova, Lydia}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:53:55 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:58:11 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {139--175}, Title = {Acquisition of Multiple Questions in {E}nglish, {R}ussian, and {M}alayalam}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Franck:2011, Abstract = {One major controversy in the field of language development concerns the nature of children's early representations of word order. While studies using preferential looking methods suggest that children as early as 20 months represent word order as an abstract, grammatical property, experiments using the Weird Word Order (WWO) paradigm suggest that it is represented as a lexical property until age four. In order to shed light on these contradictions, two types of arguments are developed. First, it is argued that the observations taken to support the lexical hypothesis, based on the WWO paradigm, have been incorrectly interpreted. Second, an experiment is reported using the standard WWO paradigm with minimal changes in the design. Two groups of French children were contrasted (mean ages 2;11 and 3;11). Both groups were found to (i) reproduce WWO at a similar, low rate; (ii) correct WWO at a similar rate, even with pseudo-verbs; (iii) reuse the grammatical, SVO order significantly more often than WWO; and (iv) produce grammatical markers, indicating productive use, in grammatical sentences only. We conclude that empirical evidence converges to support the grammatical hypothesis.}, Author = {Franck, Julie and Millotte, Severine and Lassotta, Romy}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:51:04 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:52:30 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {2}, Pages = {121--135}, Title = {Early Word Order Representations: Novel Arguments Against Old Contradictions}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Pearl:2011, Abstract = {Parametric systems have been proposed as models of how humans represent knowledge about language, motivated in part as a way to explain children's rapid acquisition of linguistic knowledge. Given this, it seems reasonable to examine if children with knowledge of parameters could in fact acquire the adult system from the data available to them. That is, we explore an argument from acquisition for this knowledge representation. We use the English metrical phonology system as a nontrivial case study and test several computational models of unbiased probabilistic learners. Special attention is given to the modeled learners' input and the psychological plausibility of the model components in order to consider the learning problem from the perspective of children ac- quiring their native language. We find that such cognitively inspired unbiased probabilistic learners uniformly fail to acquire the English grammar proposed in recent metrical studies from English child-directed speech, suggesting that probabilistic learning alone is insufficient to acquire the correct grammar when using this parametric knowledge representation. Several potential sources of this failure are discussed, along with their implications for the parametric knowledge representation and the trajectory of acquisition for English metrical phonology.}, Author = {Pearl, Lisa S.}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:48:19 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:49:58 +0000}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {2}, Pages = {87--120}, Title = {When Unbiased Probabilistic Learning Is Not Enough: Acquiring Parametric System of Metrical Phonology}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Zimmerman:2011, Abstract = {The article investigates the functional architecture of complex pronominal quantifying expressions (PQEs) in Low German, such as jeder-een `everyone' and keen-een `no-one', which provide overt evidence for a Num-projection, situated between the NP- and DP-layer. The feature specification of Num as [+lattice] or [−lattice] is responsible for whether the DP denotes into the domain of atomic or mass/plural entities, respectively. In the case of complex PQEs, the syntactic Num-head hosts the overt element een `a, one', which carries a [−lattice] feature, thus ensuring that the PQE ranges exclusively over the domain of atomic entities, but not mass or plural entities. The Num-head een differs from its simplex counterpart wat `something', which is analyzed as an NP-proform with an underspecified [lattice]-feature. As a result, wat can range over atomic and mass domains alike. In the final part of the article, it is argued that wat is also underspecified for the operator feature [rel/wh], for which reason it can also function as an interrogative expression (what) and as a relative pronoun (which), respectively, depending on the syntactic context. Throughout the article, the Low German data are compared with relevant data from other German dialects and Germanic and Romance languages, pointing out similarities and differences in the syntactic structure and feature content of PQEs across these languages and dialects.}, Author = {Zimmerman, Malte}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:41:51 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:43:24 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {203--240}, Title = {On the functional architecture of {DP} and the feature of content of pronominal quantifiers in {L}ow {G}erman}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Belder:2011a, Abstract = {This paper contributes to our understanding of countability in two ways. First, I derive the various mass and count readings from the interaction between two syntactic features, viz. [Div] (which creates countable items, cf. Borer 2005) and [Size] (which creates units). Second, I show how crosslinguistic variation in the expression of countability can be reduced to whether [Div] and [Size] each head their own projection or are combined on a single syntactic head (cf. Thr{\'a}insson 1996; Bobaljik and Thr{\'a}insson, Syntax, 1: 37-71, 1998). Finally, I discuss the various Germanic morphemes that can realize the [Size] feature.}, Author = {Belder, Marijke De}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:40:05 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:41:40 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {173--202}, Title = {A morphosyntactic decomposition of countability in {G}ermanic}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Zeijlstra:2011, Abstract = {Negative Indefinites (NIs) in languages such as Dutch and German may give rise to split-scope readings. Sentences like German Du must keine Krawatte anziehen (`you must wear no tie') have a reading where the modal takes scope in between the negation and the indefinite. In this paper I argue that West Germanic NIs are not negative quantifiers (in the Montegovian sense), but complex syntactic structures that consist of an abstract negative operator and an indefinite that are spelled out as a single word. Split-scope effects result from application of the copy theory of movement. I argue that in split-scope constructions, though they are spelled out as a single word, after Quantifier Raising the negative operator is interpreted in a higher copy and the indefinite in a lower copy of the NI. Furthermore I demonstrate that alternative analyses that take NIs in Dutch and German to be negative quantifiers, n-words, or the result of amalgamation or incorporation processes face problems that the analysis presented in this paper does not encounter.}, Author = {Zeijlstra, Hedde}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:37:45 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:39:31 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {111--138}, Title = {On the syntactically complex status of negative indefinites}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Putnam:2011, Abstract = {This paper pursues a minimalist analysis of the s-inflection that appears as an enclitic on the all in certain dialects of Midwestern American English; a construction called the alls-construction by Putnam & van Koppen (2009). Following Putnam & van Koppen, we demonstrate that the inter-clausal aspects of the alls-construction can be accounted for via Probe-Goal (Agree) relations similar in many respects to the generative treatment of C(omplementizer)-agreement in West Germanic languages and dialects. Regarding the intra-clausal dimension of this construction, based on the discussion of Den Dikken et al. (2000), we demonstrate that the alls-construction is most accurately described as a Type-A specificational pseudocleft. The analysis of the alls-construction developed here unites both the inter- and intra-clausal aspects of this construction in a parsimonious way.}, Author = {Putnam, Michael T. and Koppen, Marjo van}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:34:48 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:37:00 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic LinguisticsJ}, Number = {2}, Pages = {81--109}, Title = {All there is to know about the \emph{alls}-construction}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kristoffersen:2011, Abstract = {This article discusses the transition from a system with contrastive, segmental quantity in Old Norse into the present day system characterizing most Norwegian and Swedish dialects, where stressed syllables are obligatorily bimoraic. Starting with variation within East Norwegian, two intermediate varieties between Old Norse and the modern system are identified, and the four varieties are then related to each other by means of constraint reranking within an Optimality Theory analysis. A full factorial typology based on the four constraints involved is then developed. This renders four possible intermediate stages between Old Norse and the modern system, of which two are attested in East Norwegian. When the scope subsequently is widened to all varieties of Norwegian and Swedish, it is shown that all the intermediate varieties predicted by the analysis are attested. More importantly, no other varieties than those predicted seem to exist, even if such varieties can be construed. This suggests that the grammar developed to account for the changes not only is empirically adequate, but also has explanatory value.}, Author = {Kristoffersen, Gjert}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:33:23 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:37:33 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {47--80}, Title = {Quantity in {O}ld {N}orse and modern peninsular {N}orth {G}ermanic}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Ott:2011a, Abstract = {In German, mass nouns can be turned into count nouns by means of two alternative strategies: either by using them in connection with a numeral classifier, or by adding the diminutive morpheme (-chen). In this paper, I argue that the two strategies are structurally exactly parallel, with both kinds of elements (numeral classifiers and diminutive -chen) being exponents of an individuating functional head. The (superficial) difference is that -chen--- which I show is a clitic-like element---triggers obligatory movement of the nominalized root to its Spec. By contrast, this movement is optional with a (non-deficient) numeral classifier, yielding both `analytic' and `compound' forms. The picture that emerges from the discussion is a unified analysis of count structures in German.}, Author = {Ott, Dennis}, Date-Added = {2012-03-31 17:31:17 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-31 17:32:09 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--46}, Title = {Diminutive-formation in {G}erman}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @incollection{Sauerland:2008b, Address = {Berlin, Germany}, Author = {Sauerland, Uli}, Booktitle = {The Discourse Potential of Underspecified Structures}, Editor = {Steube, Anita}, Pages = {581--600}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Title = {Implicated presuppositions}, Year = {2008}} @inproceedings{AnderBois:2010, Author = {AnderBois, Scott}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of SALT XX}, Date-Added = {2012-03-25 22:01:16 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-25 22:04:56 +0000}, Editor = {Li, Nan and Lutz, David}, Pages = {451--470}, Title = {Sluicing as Anaphora to Issues}, Year = {2010}} @techreport{Beecher:2006, Author = {Beecher, Henry}, Date-Added = {2012-03-25 21:59:03 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-25 22:00:05 +0000}, Institution = {University of California, San Diego}, Title = {Pragmatic Licensing of Sluiced Prepositional Phrases}, Year = {2006}} @article{Stalnaker:2002, Author = {Stalnaker, Robert}, Date-Added = {2012-03-11 21:12:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-11 21:16:17 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Pages = {701--721}, Title = {Common Ground}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2002}} @phdthesis{Geuder:2002, Author = {Geuder, Wilhelm}, Date-Added = {2012-03-04 20:11:28 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-03-04 20:12:08 +0000}, School = {Universit{\"a}t T{\"u}bingen}, Title = {Oriented Adverbs: Issues in the Lexical Semantics of Event Adverbs}, Year = {2002}} @book{Belder:2011, Author = {Belder, Marijke De}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:50:48 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:51:28 +0000}, Publisher = {Landelijke Onderzoeckschool Taalwetenschap}, Title = {Roots and Affixes: Eliminating Lexical Categories from Syntax}, Year = {2011}} @book{Heringa:2011, Author = {Heringa, Herman}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:49:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:50:23 +0000}, Publisher = {Landelijke Onderzoeckschool Taalwetenschap}, Title = {Appositional Constructions}, Year = {2011}} @book{Kahnemuyipour:2009, Address = {New York, New York}, Author = {Kahnemuyipour, Arsalan}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:47:50 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:48:59 +0000}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Series = {Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics}, Title = {The Syntax of Sentential Stress}, Year = {2009}} @book{Reuland:2011, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Reuland, Eric}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:45:07 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:47:26 +0000}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Anaphora and Language Design}, Year = {2011}} @book{Buring:2005b, Author = {B{\"u}ring, Daniel}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:44:13 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:44:58 +0000}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Series = {Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics}, Title = {Binding Theory}, Year = {2005}} @article{Manetta:2012, Abstract = {In the most recent account of rightward displacement in Hindi-Urdu, Bhatt and Dayal (2007) claim that all postverbal constituents are derived via rightward movement of a remnant VP. In this article, I argue that the remnant-VP approach does not allow us to make distinctions between the positioning requirements of DPs and CPs. I propose an account of rightward scrambling (following Mahajan 1988) that cap- tures the correlation in Hindi-Urdu between scope and linear order, and I claim that finite complement CPs do not undergo scrambling, but are instead obligatorily aligned to the right edge of their containing clause at the level of PF.}, Author = {Manetta, Emily}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:38:20 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:39:33 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {43--74}, Title = {Reconsidering Rightward Scrambling: Postverbal Constituents in {H}indi-{U}rdu}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Harves:2012, Abstract = {A survey of a number of the world's languages reveals that only those languages that have a transitive verb used to express possession (i.e., Have-languages) also have a transitive verb `need'. No Be-language lacking a transitive verb for possession has a transitive verb `need'. This generalization suggests a Hale and Keyser (1993, 2002)--style incorporation approach, whereby nominal `need' incorporates to an unpronounced verbal HAVE, yielding transitive verbal `need'.}, Author = {Harves, Stephanie and Kayne, Richard S.}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:36:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:37:58 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {120--132}, Title = {Having `Need' and Needing 'Have'}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Berent:2012, Abstract = {A computational model by Hayes and Wilson (2008) seemingly captures a diverse range of phonotactic phenomena without variables, contrasting with the presumptions of many formal theories. Here, we examine the plausibility of this approach by comparing generalizations of identity restrictions by this architecture and human learners. Whereas humans generalize identity restrictions broadly, to both native and nonnative phonemes, the original model and several related variants failed to generalize to nonnative phonemes. In contrast, a revised model equipped with variables more closely matches human behavior. These findings suggest that, like syntax, phonological grammars are endowed with algebraic relations among variables that support across- the-board generalizations.}, Author = {Berent, Iris and Wilson, Colin and Marcus, Gary F. and Bemis, Douglas K.}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:35:03 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:36:37 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {97--119}, Title = {On the Role of Variables in Phonology: Remarks on {H}ayes and {W}ilson 2008}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Barrie:2012, Author = {Barrie, Michael and Mathieu, {\'E}ric}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:33:58 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:34:57 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {133--142}, Title = {Head Movement and Noun Incorporation}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Ackema:2012, Abstract = {Benmamoun and Lorimor (2006) dispute the claim made in Ackema and Neeleman 2003 that certain agreement alternations in Standard Arabic, and various related phenomena, can successfully be analyzed in terms of postsyntactic spell-out rules that are sensitive to prosodic structure. In this reply, we argue that the data discussed by Benmamoun and Lorimor do not warrant their conclusion, and in fact provide further evidence in favor of our original analysis.}, Author = {Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:32:29 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:33:32 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {75--96}, Title = {Agreement Weakening at {PF}: A Reply to {B}enmamoun and {L}orimor}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Aguero-Bautista:2012, Abstract = {It is generally assumed that the weak crossover (WCO) effect arises when an operator fails to bind a pronoun that stands in a particular syntactic configuration with the given operator. In this article, I introduce a new kind of crossover effect in which the binding dependencies of two different operators work in tandem to yield the given effect. The new effect is radically different from the traditional crossover cases, which involve the binding dependency of just one operator. I show that theories that define the WCO principle as a condition regulating the binding of pronouns cannot account for the new effect. I also show that to account for all the varieties of crossover effects, the WCO principle must be defined as a condition regulating the semantic relation of dependence and must make use of the notion of Spell-Out domain discussed by Chomsky (2001, 2004).}, Author = {Ag{\"u}ero-Bautista, Calixto}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:31:21 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:32:25 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--41}, Title = {Team Weak Crossover}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Larson:2012, Author = {Larson, Bradley}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:30:10 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:31:07 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {143--150}, Title = {A Dilemma with Accounts of {R}ight {N}ode {R}aising}, Volume = {43}, Year = {2012}} @article{Roelofsen:2011, Author = {Roelofsen, Floris}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:28:14 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:29:02 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {682--697}, Title = {Free Variable Economy}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Morzycki:2011, Author = {Morzycki, Marcin}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:26:20 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:27:57 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {671--682}, Title = {Quantification Galore}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Shlonsky:2011, Abstract = {Why and its counterparts in some languages are argued to be externally merged in a low left-peripheral specifier of a dedicated functional category and subsequently moved to a criterial position higher in the left-peripheral space. The analysis considers both short- and long-distance construals of why, asymmetries of why-extraction in finite and nonfinite complement clauses, the position of `why' in a multiple wh-movement language like Romanian, and the differences between why and how come. The analysis sharpens the formal differences between movement to a criterial position and movement out of cyclic domains via escape hatches.}, Author = {Shlonsky, Ur and Soare, Gabriela}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:24:39 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:25:43 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {651--669}, Title = {Where's `Why'?}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Harbour:2011, Abstract = {The semantic basis and morphosyntactic reflexes of Kiowa-Tanoan noun classification are perspicuously captured in a system with three bivalent number features: [+-singular], [+-augmented], [+-group]. Privative analyses of the same facts require, inter alia, features without semantic motivation, syntactic mechanisms that violate Inclusivity, and feature annotation reminiscent of bivalence. The semantic atoms of number are, therefore, bivalent.}, Author = {Harbour, Daniel}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:23:19 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:24:24 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {561--594}, Title = {Valence and Atomic Number}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Iatridou:2011, Abstract = {Lasnik (1999) has claimed that NegDPs in derived subject position cannot be interpreted in the embedded clause and do not undergo A-chain reconstruction. We show that with a well-defined set of predi- cates, including deontic modals and raising predicates, scope diminishment of NegDP is observed. We argue, nevertheless, that scope diminishment in these cases is not produced by A-chain reconstruction. We also show that A-chain reconstruction of the indefinite part is possible. We conclude that the claim that NegDP does not undergo reconstruc- tion reduces to the observation that the negative ingredient cannot reconstruct, and we suggest why this should be so. If we are correct, the analysis removes an obstacle to the view that A-chains exhibit syntactic reconstruction.}, Author = {Iatridou, Sabine and Sichel, Ivy}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:21:50 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:23:04 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {595--629}, Title = {Negative {DP}s {A}-Movement, and Scope Diminishment}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kaplan:2011, Abstract = {This article argues that some ostensible advantages of Optimality The- ory with Candidate Chains (OT-CC) over classic OT are actually liabil- ities. OT-CC correctly predicts that Chamorro umlaut occurs only when trigger and target are adjacent. But OT-CC is incompatible with similar phenomena like Central Venetan metaphony, and attempts to modify OT-CC to produce metaphony impair the theory's handling of umlaut. Classic OT provides a superior approach: constraints grounded in prominence asymmetries produce the umlaut facts, and there is no conflict with analyses of metaphony. This result suggests that despite OT-CC's advancements in treatments of opacity, the theory's machinery remains inadequate in important ways.}, Author = {Kaplan, Aaron}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:20:26 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:21:28 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {631--650}, Title = {Harmonic Improvement without Candidate Chains in Chamorro}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Donati:2011, Abstract = {A tenet of any version of phrase structure theory is that a lexical item can transmit its label when merged with another category. We assume that if it is internally merged, a lexical item can turn a clause into a nominal phrase. If the relabeling lexical item is a wh-word, a free relative results; if it is an N, a full relative results; if it is a non-wh D, a pseudorelative results. It follows that the head of a relative construction cannot be more complex than a lexical item. We show massive evidence that when it is otherwise (e.g., the book about Obama that you bought), the modifier is late-merged after the noun has moved and relabeled the structure.}, Author = {Donati, Caterina and Cecchetto, Carlo}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:18:09 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:20:08 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {519--560}, Title = {Relabeling Heads: A Unified Account for Relativization Structures}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Almotahari:2011, Author = {Almotahari, Mahrad}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:16:23 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:17:39 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {509--517}, Title = {An Antinomy about Anaphora}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Tanaka:2011, Abstract = {On the basis of an asymmetry between VP-deletion and pseudogapping, Merchant (2008a) concludes that ellipsis is conditioned by syntax. This article demonstrates that both pseudogapping and VP-deletion potentially allow voice mismatch. The unacceptable cases of voice mismatch in these constructions are attributed to a discourse factor (Kehler 2000, 2002). Nevertheless, since sluicing does not allow voice mismatch (Merchant 2001, 2007) even in the same context that allows voice mismatch in VP-ellipsis, Merchant's (2007, 2008a) conclusion is still valid. A syntactic condition on ellipsis is proposed, based on a semantic condition from Takahashi and Fox 2005. Kehler's discourse explanation is phrased in a revised format.}, Author = {Tanaka, Hidekazu}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:14:49 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:16:06 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {470--490}, Title = {Voice Mismatch and Syntactic Identity}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Watanabe:2011, Abstract = {Corver (2009) accounts for the postadjectival placement of the measure phrase in Romance by preposing the adjectival phrase over the measure phrase. I show that this movement serves to avoid violating locality when the T head tries to enter into a multiple agreement relation with the adjective as well as with the subject. I also suggest that the feature content of the potentially intervening measure phrase influences the range of parametric options.}, Author = {Watanabe, Akira}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:13:41 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:14:28 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {490--507}, Title = {Adjectival Inflection and the Position of Measure Phrases}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Steddy:2011, Abstract = {We propose an analysis that derives Cinque's (2005) typology of linear orders involving a demonstrative, numeral, adjective, and noun through four Optimality Theory constraints requiring leftward align- ment of these items. We show that remnant movement is ungrammatical whenever it produces universally suboptimal alignments, compared with remnant-movement-free structures. Any movement is permitted, but only the best alignment configurations surface as grammatical. We also show that Cinque's original analysis must encode the structural derivations of all attested orders as parametric values of the associated languages. Our analysis need not make similar structural stipulations, as the different attested structures emerge from constraint reranking.}, Author = {Steddy, Sam and Samek-Lodovici, Vieri}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:11:48 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:12:51 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {445--469}, Title = {On the Ungrammaticality of Remnant Movement in the Derivation of Greenberg's Universal 20}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Moro:2011, Abstract = {Why must a coordinative head show up before an adverbial wh-phrase in situ in Italian? In this article, I explore this rather neglected fact, showing that it reveals an otherwise hidden structure. More specifically, I propose that the coordinative head does not directly merge with the wh-phrase it precedes; rather, it takes a full clausal complement, inducing remnant movement and stranding of the highest wh-phrase. This configuration yields the observed word order and explains many properties of these constructions by means of independent locality conditions. I argue that it is a rescue strategy languages may adopt to meet a structural property of the left periphery, and I address some questions that the comparative perspective raises.}, Author = {Moro, Andrea}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:10:25 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:11:42 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {389--411}, Title = {Clause Structure Folding and the ``Wh-in-Situ Effect''}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Nevins:2011a, Abstract = {This article discusses morphological markedness as a trigger and target of postsyntactic feature-deletion operations (impoverishment; Bobaljik 2003, Bonet 1991, Halle 1997, Halle and Marantz 1993, Harley 2008, Noyer 1992, 1998) and, taking number as a case study, argues that dual is more marked than plural, in accordance with traditional and more recent approaches to inflectional morphology. In a system that employs abstract binary features, dual may be represented by a combination of the features [-singular,-augmented] (Conklin 1962, Noyer 1992), and the feature [-augmented] is marked in the context of [-singular]. This article draws a formal distinction between markedness- targeted impoverishment and markedness-triggered impoverishment, arguing that the latter is an important diagnostic for morphological markedness. Exemplification comes from syncretisms either directed at or conditioned by the dual in S{\'a}mi, Sorbian, Slovenian, Warlpiri, and Zuni, the last of which has been argued by Cowper (2005) to show that dual is less marked than plural.}, Author = {Nevins, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:08:09 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:10:19 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {413--444}, Title = {Marked Targets versus Marked Triggers and Impoverishment of the Dual}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Hartman:2011, Abstract = {This article presents an argument from ellipsis parallelism that traces of all types of movement receive a bound variable interpretation at LF. MaxElide, a constraint on ellipsis, is used to probe the size of parallelism domains and detect the semantic contribution of a variety of traces. The data examined reveal a detailed interaction between wh-movement from various positions, T-to-C movement, and move- ment of subjects. I offer an analysis based on the overlapping variable- binder relationships created by these movements. The theoretical con- clusion is that A'-, A-, and head movement all produce traces that feed interpretation. This conclusion argues directly against several proposals that deprive non-A' movements of (certain) semantic effects---for example, proposals that head movement occurs at PF, or that A-movement does not leave traces.}, Author = {Hartman, Jeremy}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 17:05:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:07:39 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {367--388}, Title = {The Semantic Uniformity of Traces: Evidence from Ellipsis Parallelism}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Panagiotidis:2010, Abstract = {This paper takes a comparative look at idiosyncratic instances of mixed categories in Korean, Japanese, Hebrew, and Greek, arguing them to be genuine mixed projections, despite their inability to function as arguments---which in turn is a well-known characteristic of mixed projections, such as English gerunds. After their syntactic behavior is examined, it is argued that these nonargumental mixed projections are embedded within prepositional phrases headed by (null) temporal prepositions. This derives their peculiar properties while successfully capturing the differences between them and purely verbal/clausal projections such as infinitivals.}, Author = {Panagiotidis, E. Phoevos}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:59:45 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:01:34 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {165--182}, Title = {Nonargumental Mixed Projections}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hiraiwa:2010a, Abstract = {It has been well known since Saito 1989 that scrambling in Japanese is subject to the Proper Binding Condition (PBC; see Fiengo 1977). As I will show, remnant movement in Japanese is heavily constrained, and in fact, no remnants created by scrambling or topicalization can be moved over extracted elements. This article argues that the alleged cases for the PBC in Japanese should be reconsidered in favor of elimination of the PBC, and its effects should be derived from the architecture of the narrow syntax: interactions between Cyclic Multiple Spell-Out, the Phase Impenetrability Condition, and a refined mechanism of probing. Specifically, I argue that scrambling in Japanese uniformly targets the edge of a phase. Under this theory, ``remnant movement'' just reduces to an artifact, and it follows that there is no special constraint on remnant movement per se. I will demonstrate that my theory brings significant new empirical advantages and that the same mechanism provides a unified account for various unexplained constraints on scrambling.}, Author = {Hiraiwa, Ken}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:56:37 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:59:16 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {133--164}, Title = {Scrambling to the Edge}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Baker:2010a, Abstract = {The Ibibio language has the special property that agreement with a single grammatical subject can appear multiple times in the same clause. After showing that this is a general phenomenon in the language, we argue that every verbal functional head in Ibibio---Aspect, Auxiliary, Mood, and Participle, as well as Tense---acts as a probe, capable of initiating an Agree relationship. Furthermore, a close comparison of agreement in indicative, subjunctive, negative, and infinitival clauses shows that these functional heads do not agree with the subject directly; rather each agrees with the next highest functional head within the extended projection. The facts of Ibibio thus point toward a version of Chomsky's theory of Agree in which any functional head can be the probe in an agreement relation, and any functional head can be the goal in such a relation.}, Author = {Baker, Mark and Willie, Willie Udo}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:54:52 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:56:39 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {99--132}, Title = {Agreement in {I}bibio: From Every Head to Every Head}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Cecchetto:2010, Abstract = {In this paper, we critically reexamine the two algorithms that govern phrase structure building according to Chomsky (2008). We replace them with a unique algorithm, the Probing Algorithm, which states that the Probe of any kind of Merge always provides the label. In addition to capturing core cases of phrase structure building, this algorithm sheds light on Principle C effects and on the syntax of wh-constructions, which we analyze as cases of conflict between two Probes. In these two configurations a lexical item (which should become the label, being endowed with an Edge Feature that qualifies it by definition as a Probe) is merged with a syntactic object that, being the probe of the operation, should also become the label. In one case, this conflict produces two alternative outputs (a question or a free relative) that are both acceptable. In Principle C configurations, one of the resulting outputs (the one where the lexical item ``wins'') produces an object that is not interpretable. This way, Principle C effects are reduced to cases of mislabeling, with no need to postulate a specific condition to rule them out.}, Author = {Cecchetto, Carlo and Donati, Caterina}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:53:32 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:54:21 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {241--278}, Title = {On Labeling: Principle {C} and Head Movement}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Kramer:2010, Abstract = {The definite marker in Amharic has an unusually complex pattern of distribution---its position varies depending on whether the DP contains an adjective, a relative clause, multiple adjuncts, a demonstrative, or just a noun. In this paper, a minimalist/Distributed Morphology analysis of the definite marker is developed based on the idea that the definite marker is the realization of D when it is obligatory, and the reflex of a definiteness agreement process when it is optional. Evidence is presented that D undergoes the morphological operation Local Dislocation (Embick & Noyer 2001) in Amharic, and that Local Dislocation is subject to the Phase Impenetrability Condition---the definite marker cannot attach within a phase that has been previously spelled out. Definiteness agreement, however, does not seem to respect phase impenetrability, which leads to the suggestion that phase impenetrability is only relevant after Linearization. From a broader perspective, the paper explores the effect of minimalist assumptions about syntactic cyclicity (cyclic spell-out by phase, phase impenetrability) on the cyclicity of morphological operations.}, Author = {Kramer, Ruth}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:52:08 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:53:06 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {196--240}, Title = {The {A}mharic Definite Marker and the Syntax-Morphology Interface}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Fedorenko:2010, Abstract = {This paper quantitatively evaluates the empirical claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability (e.g., Bolinger 1978, Kayne 1983)---a claim that posed a problem for accounts of the subject/object asymmetry in multiple-wh-questions (e.g., Chomsky 1973, 1993; Lasnik & Saito 1984; Pesetsky 1987, 2000; Richards 2001). Recently, Clifton et al. (2006) evaluated this claim using quantitative methods and failed to find support for it. However, a potential concern with Clifton et al.'s results was insufficient power to detect the effect of the third wh-phrase, possibly because of variance associated with several potential interpretations of multiple-wh-questions in null contexts. The goal of this paper is to extend the findings of Clifton et al. to cases where the critical sentences are presented in supportive contexts, so that the pair-list reading---the reading that has been argued to result in Superiority effects---is unambiguously supported. The results of the current study were similar to those of Clifton et al. and therefore provide further evidence against the claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability.}, Author = {Fedorenko, Evelina and Gibson, Edward}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:50:11 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:51:33 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {183--195}, Title = {Adding a Third Wh-phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-initial Multiple-wh-questions}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Neeleman:2010, Abstract = { In this paper we consider the impact of the theory of phrase structure for the encoding of syntactic dependencies and, in particular, for the way movement is represented. We show that the conception of movement as copying plus deletion (the so-called copy theory of movement) is incompatible with well-motivated conditions on phrase structure. The alternative we develop is a local encoding mediated by percolation of selectional requirements comparable to the slash features of HPSG. The proposed local encoding of movement is superior to the copy theory in at least three respects: (i) it explains why movement must target a c-commanding position, (ii) it can account for surprising restrictions on scope reconstruction, and (iii) it can capture patterns of interaction between different types of movement. In the first two cases, the copy theory falls short of the mark; in the third, the theory proposed here seems more parsimonious.}, Author = {Neeleman, Ad and Koot, Hans van de}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:47:11 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:49:02 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {331-372}, Title = {A Local Encoding of Syntactic Dependencies and its Consequences for the Theory of Movement}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Jayaseelan:2010, Abstract = { It is assumed that verbal stems and their suffixal inflection come together by phrasal movement---specifically, remnant-VP preposing. Remnant-VP preposing is analyzed as two movements: the ``evacuation'' of a V's complement out of the VP (termed stacking), and the ``evacuated'' VP's movement to the (immediate) left of Inflection for V to pick up inflection. The VP movement can strand or pied-pipe the stacked material, giving rise to VO or OV order. The fact that sequences of Vs in the head-final order cannot be ``interrupted'' by scrambled material is shown to be a consequence of the stacking analysis. The position of Focus in VO and OV languages is also explained in this way. Stacking and VP preposing can be separated by merge of other elements than Inflection in some languages, although not in others. French allows such anticipatory stacking and English does not---giving rise to their seeming difference regarding ``V raising.''}, Author = {Jayaseelan, K. A.}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:46:10 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:49:29 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {298--330}, Title = {Stacking, Stranding, and Pied-Piping: A Proposal about Word Order}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Clifton:2010a, Abstract = {Ellipsis is subject to both syntactic and discourse conditions. Here we explore the discourse condition that favors antecedents that are part of the main assertion of an utterance. We argue that the main assertion tendency is best captured in the processor, not the grammar. Two experiments test verb-phrase ellipsis examples with antecedents in a conditional. One suggests that, because of the main assertion tendency, a reader considers full conditional antecedents and not just verb-phrase antecedents. However, when the antecedent of the conditional expresses already-given information and essentially becomes redundant, fewer full conditional antecedents are chosen for the verb-phrase ellipsis, as if the consequent clause has become the assertion of the conditional sentence with the if-clause essentially canceling out. The second experiment explores examples where a modal is added inside the if-clause, rendering the conditional counterfactual. As in other examples of flawed or imperfect ellipsis, the nonactuality entailment/implicature improves the acceptability of such examples.}, Author = {Clifton, Charles, Jr. and Frazier, Lyn}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:44:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:49:50 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {279--297}, Title = {Imperfect {E}llipsis: Antecedents beyond Syntax?}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Richards:2011, Abstract = {This article offers a critical conceptual discussion and refinement of Chomsky's (2000, 2001, 2007, 2008) phase system, addressing many of the problematic aspects highlighted in the critique of Boeckx & Grohmann (2007) and seeking to resolve these issues, in particular the stipulative and arbitrary properties of phases and phase edges encoded in the (various versions of the) Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC). Chomsky's (2000) original conception of phases as lexical subarrays is demonstrated to derive these properties straightforwardly once a single assumption about the pairwise composition of phases is made, and the PIC is reduced to its necessary core under the Strong Minimalist Thesis (SMT)---namely, the provision of an edge. Finally, a comparison is undertaken of the lexical-subarray conception of phases with the feature-inheritance system of Chomsky 2007, 2008, in which phases are simply the locus of uninterpretable features (probes). Both conceptions are argued to conform to the SMT, and both converge on a pairwise composition of phases. However, the two conceptions of phases are argued to be mutually incompatible in numerous fundamental ways, with no current prospect of unification. The lexical-subarray conception of phases is then to be preferred on grounds of greater empirical adequacy.}, Author = {Richards, Marc D.}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:43:13 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:44:23 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {74--95}, Title = {Deriving the Edge: What's in a Phase?}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Lin:2011, Abstract = {This paper argues that Mandarin Chinese clauses exhibit the finite/nonfinite contrast, and, based on this discovery, shows that the EPP is the driving force for A-movement. The evidence is the raising of arguments from the TP complements of different kinds of modals. It is argued that the epistemic modals in Mandarin Chinese take a finite TP complement, whereas the modal hui`will' and the root modals take a nonfinite TP complement. Though the epistemic modals take a finite TP complement, they nonetheless permit subject-to-subject raising. This phenomenon can be accounted for if we assume that the EPP drives A-movement, and agreement blocks it. Mandarin Chinese does not have grammatical features; as a consequence, the subject of a finite clause does not perform checking of grammatical features, and thus is free to raise. This phenomenon, therefore, is evidence against the checking-based theory of A-movement. If feature checking is involved in raising in Mandarin Chinese sentences, extra assumptions must be made, with a heavy burden of proof on the checking-based theory.}, Author = {Lin, Tzong-Hong Jonah}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:41:51 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:42:49 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {48--73}, Title = {Finiteness of Clauses and Raising of Arguments in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Goodall:2011, Abstract = {Both English and Spanish exhibit an inversion effect in wh-questions: a verbal element must appear to the left of the subject. Analyses differ, however, as to whether this effect is due to similar syntactic mechanisms in the two languages or not. The phenomenon of judgment satiation, in which certain unacceptable sentence types improve upon repeated exposure, is used here to provide new evidence addressing this issue. It is shown that unacceptable wh-questions in Spanish are susceptible to satiation, but their counterparts in English are not, which suggests that different mechanisms are responsible for the inversion effect in the two languages. In addition to providing new evidence regarding the nature of inversion in wh-questions, this study also constitutes a test case for using satiation in the service of comparative syntax.}, Author = {Goodall, Grant}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:40:27 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:41:28 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {29--47}, Title = {Syntactic Satiation and the Inversion Effect in {E}nglish and {S}panish Wh-Questions}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Fernandez-Salgueiro:2011, Abstract = {This paper reevaluates approaches that attempt to explain the properties of null subjects in Romance null-subject languages (NSLs) by appealing to the parameterized existence of a lexical entry of a null pronominal category, namely, pro. I propose instead that the fact that these languages allow null subjects in finite-clause contexts can be deduced from other properties of their grammars, and so it need not be lexically stipulated. I show that within a derivational approach without look-ahead, the theoretical apparatus needed to generate further-raising (A-movement after Spec--head agreement with a φ-complete Tense), a phenomenon that is found in Romance NSLs, automatically generates null subjects as well. I will then account for the thus-far-unexplained correlation that if a language allows further-raising it also allows null subjects. I first argue that the operation of Agree is parameterized with respect to Case feature valuation. Then I argue that, given this parametric difference, the phonological features of DPs in Romance NSLs can remain uninterpretable at the Sensory-Motor Interface, yielding the surface effect of a null subject, under certain assumptions about Case and its role in the derivation and about the interpretation of phonological features at the Sensory-Motor Interface.}, Author = {Fern{\'a}ndez-Salgueiro, Gerardo}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:38:17 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:39:45 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--28}, Title = {Romance Null Subjects at the Sensory-Motor Interface}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Sprouse:2011, Abstract = {This paper reports a series of formal acceptability-judgment experiments designed to investigate the syntactic properties of a relatively understudied type of wh-dependency: multiple wh-questions in English. By using a factorial definition of island effects made available only by formal experiments, we report an unpredicted pattern of acceptability that suggests the existence of reverse island effects for whether and adjunct islands inside of multiple wh-questions, but not for subject and CNPC islands. We argue that this unpredicted effect can best be analyzed by taking into account the parsing processes that are necessary for real-time comprehension of multiple wh-questions in English. We propose that multiple wh-questions require a backward search for an antecedent that is in many ways similar to the forward search for a gap site that occurs in single wh-questions in English (Frazier & Clifton 1989). We then present additional acceptability-judgment experiments in both English and Japanese to test the predictions of the backward-search analysis.}, Author = {Sprouse, Jon and Fukuda, Shin and Ono, Hajime and Kluender, Robert}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:35:38 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:37:40 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {179--203}, Title = {Reverse Island Effects and Backward Search for a Licensor in Multiple Wh-Questions}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Sigurdhsson:2011a, Abstract = {The so-called New Passive in Icelandic takes the form `it was elected us' (or, e.g., `then was elected us', without an expletive), instead of the standard passive form `we were elected'. It has neither A-movement to subject nor acc-to-nom conversion, which are otherwise diagnostic of the canonical passive in Icelandic and related languages. Some researchers have argued that ``passive'' is in fact a misnomer and that the construction should instead be analyzed as an active one, with a nominative pro. This paper argues instead in favor of a minimalist analysis, where the New Passive is closely related to the impersonal P passive (with a PP, type `then was shouted at us'), which is highly common and productive in Icelandic. On the approach pursued, acc-to-nom conversion involves case-star deletion, absent from the New Passive (much as from so-called psych and fate (un)accusatives in standard Icelandic). Additionally, the New Passive has a strong vP phase edge, blocking A-movement, in contrast to the defective vP edge in the canonical passive. The paper argues that A-grounding or ``freezing'' is brought about by φ-minimality, A-islands thus arising in a parallel fashion with A′-islands.}, Author = {Sigur{\dh}sson, Halld{\'o}r {\'A}rmann}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:34:29 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:35:12 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {148--178}, Title = {On the New Passive}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Obata:2011, Abstract = {A central goal of this paper is to present a new account of improper-movement phenomena based on Chomsky's (2007, 2008) phase-based derivational approach. We claim that improper movement is excluded by virtue of Agree failure between a moving element and a finite T as a consequence of ``feature-splitting'' Internal Merge, which we argue is the most (or at least a very) natural implementation of Chomsky's φ-feature-inheritance system and Richards's (2007) value--transfer-simultaneity analysis. This analysis has a number of empirical and theoretical consequences: (i) regarding the explanation of A′-opacity/-transparency intervention effects (Rezac 2003, Carstens 2005); (ii) the possible elimination, or reduction in scope, of the Activity Condition; and (iii) the possible characterization of A/A′-position types solely in terms of categorial features. Moreover, we propose that (iv) the ban on improper movement is, in fact, not universal but is morphologically parameterized (at least) between English and the Bantu language Kilega.}, Author = {Obata, Miki and Epstein, Samuel David}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:32:42 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:33:56 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {122--147}, Title = {Feature-Splitting Internal Merge: Improper Movement, Intervention and the {A/A'} Distinction}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Legate:2011, Abstract = {This article analyses the wh-scope-marking construction in Warlpiri. The literature on wh-scope-marking constructions in other languages debates the relative merits of two types of analyses---the direct-dependency account, which posits covert movement of an embedded wh-phrase to replace a matrix expletive, and the indirect-dependency account, which treats the embedded question as the restriction of a matrix wh-phrase. I argue that an explanation of the Warlpiri data can only be achieved through a variant of the indirect-dependency approach.}, Author = {Legate, Julie Anne}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:30:59 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:32:10 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {97--121}, Title = {Warlpiri Wh-Scope Marking}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Otsuka:2011, Abstract = {This paper examines the null arguments occurring in adverbial `o-clauses in Tongan, whose characteristics are distinct from other kinds of empty categories attested in the language. I argue (a) that the empty category in question should be understood as a phonetically null SE anaphor and (b) that local- and medium-distance binding of SE anaphors must be licensed by Agree with the functional category that assigns the primary case (i.e., T in accusative languages and v in ergative languages). The study also observes that `o-clauses are similar to telic to-clauses in English as well as control subjunctives in Balkan languages in that they contain anaphoric tense, and suggests that some instances of what has been regarded as PRO in the literature might be better understood as an instance of a null SE.}, Author = {Otsuka, Yuko}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:29:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:30:30 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {265--296}, Title = {{PRO} versus Null {SE}: Case, Tense, and Empty Categories in {T}ongan}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Mikkelsen:2011, Abstract = {Recent work on object shift in the Scandinavian languages has rejected earlier syntactic analyses in favor of prosodic or information-structural accounts. In this paper I present new evidence from Danish copular clauses that argues against a prosodic analysis of the phenomenon. In particular, I show that specificational copular clauses do not allow object shift and that this fact cannot be accounted for in prosodic terms. I propose that the observed lack of object shift is due to the fixed information structure of specificational clauses: the object is invariably focused and that is what prevents it from shifting. This account dovetails with the focus-based analysis of object shift proposed by Holmberg (1999), and is also compatible with the syntactic analysis developed by Sells (2001).}, Author = {Mikkelsen, Line}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:27:35 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:28:45 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {230--264}, Title = {On Prosody and Focus in Object Shift}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Marelj:2011, Abstract = {Since the seminal work of Reinhart (1976, 1984), it has been recognized that the structural configuration for bound-variable anaphora is that of c-command. One way of deriving this variable-binding condition is to capitalize on the similarities between traces and bound pronouns and to analyze the latter as spelled-out traces (see Aoun 1982, also Hornstein 2001 for a somewhat different implementation of Aoun's idea). Taking Hornstein's (2001) analysis of bound pronouns in English as a starting point, I account for some puzzling differences between English and Serbo-Croatian in the domain of the intrasentential pronominal anaphora. By establishing the correlation between the way English and Serbo-Croatian behave with respect to the Pronoun Insertion strategy, on the one hand, and the Left Branch Condition (Ross 1967/1986), on the other, I argue that the differences under consideration boil down to the presence or absence of a DP-layer in a given language. The validity of this hypothesis is tested on a broader set of crosslinguistic data, including data from Dutch, Latin, Russian, and Spanish. The analysis I put forth supports the minimalist view of binding (Hornstein 2001, 2006; Grohmann 2003) as well as accounts of left branch extraction languages as D-less (Uriagereka 1988; Corver 1992; Boskovic 2005, 2008).}, Author = {Marelj, Marijana}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:22:33 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:27:02 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {205--229}, Title = {Bound-Variable Anaphora and Left Branch Condition}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Levinson:2011, Abstract = {A central question regarding the syntax--semantics interface is the extent to which semantic primitives correspond one-to-one with syntactic primitives. Den Dikken (1995) proposed that all possession structures can be derived from an underlying locative structure, extending the work of Freeze (1992). This paper argues that such a unified approach is untenable, as there are possession expressions in Icelandic that cannot be derived from locative structures. The Icelandic vera með construction, translated as `is with', provides important insight into the nature of have verbs. It is argued, along the lines of Kayne 1993 and Harley 2002, that have is derived from nonlocative prepositions like English with as in the man with blue eyes. A microcomparative investigation within Germanic supports an analysis whereby the variation in incorporation is correlated with variations in p heads. This analysis allows for a more natural account of the differences between have and be languages beyond Germanic.}, Author = {Levinson, Lisa}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:19:53 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:22:03 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {355--393}, Title = {Possessive {HAVE} in {G}ermanic: {HAVE} and the Role of {P}}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kim:2012, Abstract = {This paper lays the foundations for a processing model of relative acceptability levels in verb phrase ellipsis (VPE). In the proposed model, mismatching VPE examples are grammatical but less acceptable because they violate heuristic parsing strategies. This analysis is presented in a Minimalist Grammar formalism that is compatible with standard parsing techniques. The overall proposal integrates computational assumptions about parsing with a psycholinguistic linking hypothesis. These parts work together with the syntactic analysis to derive novel predictions that are confirmed in a controlled experiment.}, Author = {Kim, Christina S. and Kobele, Gregory M. and Runner, Jeffrey T. and Hale, John T.}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:17:59 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:19:50 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {318--354}, Title = {The Acceptability Cline in {VP} Ellipsis}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Danon:2011, Abstract = { An implicit assumption in most minimalist work is that DP as a whole carries all the φ-features with which external heads agree. In this paper I argue that under this assumption and the assumption that only a node that is φ-complete can delete the φ-features of a node with which it agrees, Chomsky's (2000, 2001) model of feature valuation is incompatible with a large body of work on the DP-internal distribution of φ-features, according to which neither N nor D enter the derivation being φ-complete. I consider several possible solutions and argue that this problem can most easily be avoided by adopting a feature-sharing model of the operation Agree, as proposed by Frampton & Gutmann (2006) and Pesetsky & Torrego (2007). Finally, several implications for Chomsky's theory of abstract Case are also discussed.}, Author = {Danon, Gabi}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:15:24 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:20:35 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {297--317}, Title = {Agreement and {DP}-Internal Feature Distribution}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2011}} @article{Potsdam:2012, Abstract = {This paper documents and analyzes an instance of covert A-movement, specifically covert subject-to-subject raising, in the Northwest Caucasian language Adyghe. We argue that Adyghe has a subject-to-subject raising construction in which the subject of an unaccusative verb's complement clause undergoes A-movement into the matrix clause, but it does so covertly. We refer to this phenomenon as backward raising. True backward raising is distinguished from apparent cases that have similar agreement patterns but do not show any of the other evidence for movement found in the Adyghe construction. We illustrate the contrast between true and apparent backward raising by comparing Adyghe to Greek. The existence of backward raising helps to adjudicate between various theories of covert movement. It supports a theory in which covert movement involves actual phrasal movement. Covert movement cannot be reduced to a long-distance feature-matching relation such as Agree (Chomsky 2000). Linguistic theory thus needs to incorporate both mechanisms.}, Author = {Potsdam, Eric and Polinsky, Maria}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:13:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:15:12 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {75--108}, Title = {Backward Raising}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2012}} @article{Abels:2012, Abstract = { Kayne (1994) was instrumental in putting linear asymmetries on the generative research agenda. His Linear Correspondence Axiom is seen as a restrictive, conceptually attractive proposal supported by a wealth of empirical evidence. In this paper, we take issue with this assessment. (i) We show that for every structure that violates the LCA, there is an LCA-compatible counterpart, including rightward movement structures and structures with rightward specifiers. (ii) We discuss Cinque's (2005) LCA-based analysis of word order in the extended nominal projection, demonstrating that the data in fact do not support any hypothesis stronger than a ban on rightward movement. (iii) We demonstrate that claims to the effect that central properties of phrase structure (such as headedness and the single-specifier restriction) follow from the LCA are incorrect. (iv) We show that the LCA is toothless without a restrictive theory of movement, but that it can only be reconciled with the data in the absence of such a theory.}, Author = {Abels, Klaus and Neeleman, Ad}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:11:59 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:13:22 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {25--74}, Title = {Linear Asymmetries and the {LCA}}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2012}} @article{Chou:2012, Abstract = {Based on previously unnoted data concerning wh-the-hell attitude-bearing questions in Mandarin Chinese, I argue that integrating the pragmatic notion ``point of view'' into the syntactic computation enables us to capture certain properties of wh-the-hell questions in Mandarin Chinese in a systematic and illuminating way. The two central phenomena analyzed are (1) causal zenme`how come' is not compatible with daodi`the-hell' in Chinese, and (2) in Chinese wh-the-hell questions, when daodi`the-hell' takes matrix scope while staying overtly in the embedded clause, the person feature of the matrix subject cannot be third person. I argue that explaining these phenomena depends on recognizing the logophoricity of the negative attitudes carried by daodi and causal zenme. The valuation relation that I postulate between the Point-of-View operator and an unvalued Point-of-View feature of daodi and causal zenme not only explains these data but also formally captures certain properties of the Chinese logophor ziji (cf. Huang & Liu 2001).}, Author = {Chou, Chao-Ting Tim}, Date-Added = {2012-02-19 16:08:33 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 16:11:05 +0000}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--24}, Title = {Syntax-Pragmatics Interface: {M}andarin {C}hinese Wh-the-hell and Point-of-view Operator}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2012}} @phdthesis{Bhatt:1999, Author = {Bhatt, Rajesh}, Date-Added = {2012-02-08 03:16:14 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-08 03:16:45 +0000}, School = {University of Pennsylvania}, Title = {Covert Modality in Non-Finite Contexts}, Year = {1999}} @phdthesis{Szczegielniak:2004, Author = {Szczegielniak, Adam}, Date-Added = {2012-02-05 14:05:27 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-05 14:06:21 +0000}, School = {Harvard University}, Title = {Relatativization and Ellipsis}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{Szczegielniak:2006, Address = {Amherst, Massachusetts}, Author = {Szczegielniak, Adam}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the {N}orth {E}ast {L}inguistic {S}ociety 35}, Date-Added = {2012-02-05 14:03:44 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-05 14:05:02 +0000}, Editor = {Bateman, Leah and Ussery, Cherlon}, Pages = {603--615}, Publisher = {Graduate Linguistic Student Association}, Title = {{VP} Ellipsis and Topicalization}, Year = {2006}} @inproceedings{Szczegielniak:2008, Address = {Somerville, MA}, Author = {Szczegielniak, Adam}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics}, Date-Added = {2012-02-05 14:02:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-05 14:03:39 +0000}, Editor = {Abner, Natasha and Bishop, Jason}, Pages = {404--412}, Publisher = {Cascadilla Press}, Title = {Islands in {S}luicing in {P}olish}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Kiparsky:2002, Author = {Kiparsky, Paul}, Booktitle = {More than Words}, Date-Added = {2012-01-25 16:13:48 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-25 16:15:48 +0000}, Editor = {Kaufmann, Ingrid and Stiebels, Barbara}, Pages = {179--226}, Publisher = {Akademie Verlag}, Series = {Studia Grammatica}, Title = {Disjoint Reference and the Typology of Pronouns}, Year = {2002}} @phdthesis{Fortin:2007, Author = {Fortin, Catherine Rose}, Date-Added = {2012-01-25 15:28:50 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-25 15:30:18 +0000}, School = {The University of Michigan}, Title = {Indonesian {S}luicing and {V}erb {P}hrase {E}llipsis: Description and Explanation in a {M}inimalist {F}ramework}, Year = {2007}} @book{Craenenbroeck:2010a, Author = {Craenenbroeck, Jeroen van}, Date-Added = {2012-01-25 15:22:57 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-25 15:23:55 +0000}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The Syntax of Ellipsis: Evidence from {D}utch Dialects}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hardt:2004a, Author = {Hardt, Dan}, Date-Added = {2012-01-25 15:06:17 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-25 15:07:17 +0000}, Journal = {Acta Linguistica Hafniensia}, Pages = {65-77}, Title = {Ellipsis Resolution and Inference}, Volume = {36}, Year = {2004}} @book{Kluck:2011, Address = {Groningen}, Author = {Kluck, Marlies}, Date-Added = {2012-01-24 21:16:28 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-24 21:18:17 +0000}, Publisher = {Landelijke Onderzoeckschool Taalwetenschap}, Title = {Sentence Amalgamation}, Year = {2011}} @inproceedings{Lakoff:1974, Author = {Lakoff, George}, Booktitle = {Papers from the 10th Regional Meeting of the {C}hicago {L}inguistic {S}ociety}, Date-Added = {2012-01-24 21:05:28 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-24 21:07:49 +0000}, Editor = {Galy, Michael and Fox, Robert and Bruck, Anthony}, Pages = {321--344}, Title = {Syntactic Amalgams}, Year = {1974}} @unpublished{Vicente:2008, Author = {Vicente, Luis}, Date-Added = {2012-01-24 20:14:36 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-24 20:15:30 +0000}, Note = {unpublished manuscript, UC, Santa Cruz}, Title = {Syntactic Isomorphism and non-Isomorphism under Ellipsis}, Year = {2008}} @inproceedings{Rodrigues:2006, Author = {Rodrigues, Cilene and Nevins, Andrew and Vicente, Luis}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Going Romance 2006}, Date-Added = {2012-01-24 20:12:34 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-24 20:13:53 +0000}, Editor = {Wetzels, W. Leo}, Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company}, Title = {Cleaving the Interactions between Sluicing and {P}-stranding}, Year = {2006}} @inproceedings{Chung:2006a, Address = {Berkeley, California}, Author = {Chung, Sandra}, Booktitle = {Berkeley Linguistic Society 31}, Date-Added = {2012-01-24 12:07:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-24 12:09:20 +0000}, Editor = {Cover, Rebecca T. and Kim, Yuni}, Organization = {Berkeley Linguistics Society}, Pages = {73--91}, Publisher = {UC, Berkeley}, Title = {Sluicing and the Lexicon: The Point of No Return}, Year = {2006}} @book{Barwise:1987, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Barwise, John and Etchemendy, J.}, Date-Added = {2011-12-17 14:22:15 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-17 14:22:51 +0000}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The Liar}, Year = {1987}} @article{Craenenbroeck:2010, Abstract = {Merchant (2001:120--127) presents 10 arguments against an analysis of sluicing that posits an elided cleft in the ellipsis site. This seems at odds with the growing body of literature that argues sluicing can resort to underlying clefts in order to circumvent otherwise illicit instances of preposition stranding. In this short paper I reexamine Merchant's arguments and show (a) that some of them are orthogonal to the issue at hand, and (b) that the remaining ones are compatible with the Last Resort scenario adopted by the sluicing-as-cleft literature. As such, the discussion sheds new light on the precise form of the unpronounced syntactic structure found in sluicing.}, Author = {Craenenbroeck, Jeroen van}, Date-Added = {2011-12-15 17:52:52 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-15 17:58:21 +0000}, Journal = {Lingua}, Number = {7}, Pages = {1714--1726}, Title = {Invisible Last Resort: A note on clefts as the underlying source for sluicing}, Volume = {120}, Year = {2010}} @article{Davidson:1967a, Author = {Davidson, Donald}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:37:59 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-06 12:38:59 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Philosophy}, Pages = {691--703}, Title = {Causal Relations}, Volume = {64}, Year = {1967}} @book{Davidson:1980, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Davidson, Donald}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:37:16 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-06 12:37:54 +0000}, Publisher = {Clarendon Press}, Title = {Essays on Actions and Events}, Year = {1980}} @book{Barwise:1983, Author = {Barwise, John and Perry, John}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:35:32 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-06 12:36:04 +0000}, Publisher = {The MIT Press}, Title = {Situations and Attitudes}, Year = {1983}} @book{Barwise:1988, Author = {Barwise, John}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:34:38 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-06 12:35:12 +0000}, Publisher = {Stanford: CSLI}, Title = {The Situation in Logic}, Year = {1988}} @article{Barwise:1981a, Author = {Barwise, John}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:33:51 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-06 12:34:29 +0000}, Journal = {The Journal of Philosophy}, Pages = {369--397}, Title = {Scenes and Other Situations}, Volume = {78}, Year = {1981}} @article{Bach:1986, Author = {Bach, Emmon}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:32:58 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-06 12:33:34 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Number = {1}, Pages = {5--16}, Title = {The Algebra of Events}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1986}} @book{Austin:1950, Author = {Austin, J. L.}, Date-Added = {2011-12-06 12:31:42 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-17 14:19:28 +0000}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Truth. Philosophical Papers}, Year = {1950}} @phdthesis{Aelbrecht:2009, Author = {Lobke Aelbrecht}, Date-Added = {2011-11-26 17:45:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-11-26 17:46:16 +0000}, School = {Katholieke Universiteit Brussel}, Title = {You have the right to remain silent: The syntactic licensing of ellipsis}, Year = {2009}} @article{Beck:2005, Abstract = {This paper presents a cross-linguistic survey of the interpretations that decomposition adverbs like again permit. The survey distinguishes two different types of predicates that are combined with again: lexical accomplishments like `open the door', on the one hand, and combinations of a motion verb with a directional Prepositional Phrase (PP) on the other (for example, `walk to the summit'). There is systematic cross- linguistic variation with the latter type of predicate: a language only permits a restitutive reading of again with such a predicate if the language has resultative constructions. I argue that in these languages the PP can function as a result phrase. In languages without resultatives, the PP cannot be a result phrase, and a restitutive reading is impossible. The data support an analysis of restitutive again that is sensitive to the presence of a result phrase in the syntax.}, Author = {Beck, Sigrid}, Date-Added = {2011-11-22 15:36:44 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-11-22 15:37:36 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--51}, Title = {There and Back Again: A Semantic Analysis}, Volume = {22}, Year = {2005}} @article{Bolinger:1967, Author = {Bolinger, Dwight}, Date-Added = {2011-10-27 11:46:44 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-10-27 11:47:31 +0000}, Journal = {Lingua}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--34}, Title = {Adjectives in {E}nglish: Attribution and predication}, Volume = {18}, Year = {1967}} @article{Rizzi:1990a, Author = {Rizzi, Luigi}, Date-Added = {2011-10-24 22:54:17 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-10-24 22:55:02 +0000}, Journal = {Rivista di Grammatica Generativa}, Pages = {27--42}, Title = {On the Anaphor Agreement Effect}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1990}} @incollection{Steedman:1989, Author = {Steedman, Mark}, Booktitle = {Alternative conceptions of phrase structure}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 20:13:39 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 20:16:24 +0000}, Editor = {Baltin, Mark R. and Kroch, Anthony S.}, Pages = {201--231}, Publisher = {Chicago University Press}, Title = {Constituency and Coordination in a Combinatory Grammar}, Year = {1989}} @incollection{Fukui:2001, Author = {Fukui, Naoki}, Booktitle = {The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 20:09:50 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 20:10:35 +0000}, Editor = {Baltin, Mark and Collins, Chris}, Pages = {374--406}, Publisher = {Blackwell Publishers}, Title = {Phrase Structure}, Year = {2001}} @incollection{Bernstein:2001a, Author = {Bernstein, Judy B.}, Booktitle = {The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 20:06:04 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 20:08:07 +0000}, Editor = {Baltin, Mark and Collins, Chris}, Pages = {536--561}, Publisher = {Blackwell Publishers}, Title = {The {DP} Hypothesis: Identifying Clausal Properties in the Nominal Domain}, Year = {2001}} @incollection{Dechaine:2002a, Author = {D{\'e}chaine, Rose-Marie and Wiltschko, Martina}, Booktitle = {From {NP} to {DP}}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 20:01:42 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 20:03:03 +0000}, Editor = {Coene, Martine and D'hulst, Yves}, Pages = {71--90}, Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company}, Title = {On pro-nouns and other ``pronouns''}, Volume = {1}, Year = {2002}} @incollection{Coene:2002, Author = {Coene, Martine and D'hulst, Yves}, Booktitle = {From {NP} to {DP}}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 19:59:24 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 20:01:32 +0000}, Editor = {Coene, Martine and D'hulst, Yves}, Pages = {1--46}, Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company}, Title = {Introduction: The syntax and semantics of noun phrases}, Volume = {1}, Year = {2002}} @phdthesis{Farmer:1980, Author = {Farmer, Ann K.}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 18:23:12 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 18:24:55 +0000}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {On the Interaction of Morphology and Syntax}, Year = {1980}} @book{Inkelas:1990, Address = {Chicago Illinois}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 01:26:56 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 01:29:28 +0000}, Editor = {Inkelas, Sharon and Zec, Draga}, Publisher = {University of Chicago Press}, Title = {The Phonology-Syntax Connection}, Year = {1990}} @article{Selkirk:1986, Author = {Selkirk, Elisabeth O.}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 01:09:10 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 01:09:59 +0000}, Journal = {Phonology}, Pages = {371-405}, Title = {On Derived Domains in Sentence Phonology}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1986}} @phdthesis{Pierrehumbert:1980, Author = {Pierrehumbert, Janet}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 01:04:03 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 01:04:37 +0000}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {The Phonetics and Phonology of {E}nglish Intonation}, Year = {1980}} @article{Beckman:1986, Author = {Beckman, Mary and Pierrehumbert, Janet}, Date-Added = {2011-09-04 01:01:30 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-09-04 01:02:17 +0000}, Journal = {Phonology}, Pages = {255--309}, Title = {Intonational structure of {J}apanese and {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1986}} @article{Holmberg:1999, Author = {Holmberg, Anders}, Date-Added = {2011-07-30 17:54:18 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-30 17:55:01 +0000}, Journal = {Studia Linguistica}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--39}, Title = {Remarks on {H}olmberg's Generalization}, Volume = {53}, Year = {1999}} @incollection{Stabler:2011, Author = {Stabler, Edward}, Booktitle = {Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:47:25 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:48:09 +0000}, Pages = {617--641}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Computational perspectives on minimalism}, Year = {2011}} @incollection{Stabler:1995, Author = {Stabler, Edward and Keenan, Edward}, Booktitle = {Configurations: Essays on Structure and Interpretation}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:45:57 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:46:48 +0000}, Editor = {di Sciullo, Maria}, Publisher = {Cascadilla Press}, Title = {Abstract Syntax}, Year = {1995}} @book{Kracht:2003, Author = {Kracht, Marcus}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:42:52 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:43:59 +0000}, Number = {63}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Series = {Studies in Generative Grammar}, Title = {The Mathematics of Language}, Year = {2003}} @article{Kracht:1995a, Author = {Kracht, Marcus}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:41:26 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:42:17 +0000}, Journal = {Journal of Logic, Langauge and Information}, Pages = {41--60}, Title = {Syntactic Codes and Grammar Refinement}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1995}} @inproceedings{Kracht:1993, Author = {Kracht, Marcus}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the European Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:40:09 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:41:16 +0000}, Editor = {240--249}, Title = {Mathematical Aspects of Command Relations}, Year = {1993}} @incollection{Kracht:2001, Author = {Kracht, Marcus}, Booktitle = {Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics 98}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:38:25 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:39:53 +0000}, Editor = {Moortgat, Michael}, Pages = {126--142}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {Strict Compositionality and Literal Movement Grammars}, Year = {2001}} @book{Whitehead:1910, Author = {Whitehead, Alfred North and Russell, Bertrand}, Date-Added = {2011-07-26 14:29:28 +0000}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-26 14:30:14 +0000}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Title = {Principia Mathematica}, Year = {1910}} @article{Muller:2005, Author = {M{\"u}ller, Gereon}, Date-Added = {2011-07-17 16:51:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-07-17 16:52:51 -0400}, Journal = {Theoretical Linguistics}, Number = {1-1}, Pages = {159--171}, Title = {Remarks on cyclic linearization and order preservation}, Volume = {31}, Year = {2005}} @article{Sato:2011, Author = {Sato, Yosuke}, Date-Added = {2011-06-01 08:45:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-06-01 08:47:48 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {356--365}, Title = {Radical {P}ro {D}rop and Fusional Pronominal Morphology in Colloquial {S}ingapore {E}nglish: Reply to {N}eeleman and {S}zendr{\"o}i}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Potsdam:2011, Author = {Potsdam, Eric and Polinsky, Maria}, Date-Added = {2011-06-01 08:42:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-06-01 08:43:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {345--355}, Title = {Against Covert {A}-Movement in {R}ussian Unaccusatives}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Nevins:2011, Author = {Nevins, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2011-06-01 08:41:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-06-01 08:45:42 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {339--344}, Title = {Convergent Evidence for Rolling Up {C}atalan Adjectives}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Syrett:2042, Abstract = {We revisit the purported locality constraint on Quantifier Raising (QR) by investigating children's and adults' interpretation of antecedent- contained-deletion (ACD) sentences, where the interpretation depends on the landing site targeted by QR out of an embedded clause. When ACD is embedded in a nonfinite clause, 4-year-old children and adults access both the embedded and the matrix interpretations. When ACD is embedded in a finite clause, and the matrix interpretation is generally believed to be ungrammatical, children and even some adults access both readings. These findings allow for the possibility that the source of QR's reputed locality constraint may instead be extragrammatical, and they provide insight into the development of the human sentence parser.}, Author = {Syrett, Kristen and Lidz, Jeffrey}, Date-Added = {2011-06-01 08:39:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-06-01 08:41:07 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {305--337}, Title = {Competence, Performance, and the Locality of Quantifier Raising: Evidence from 4-year-old Children}, Volume = {2}, Year = {42}} @article{Sigurdhsson:2011, Abstract = {This article pursues the idea that null arguments are derived without any statement or parameter, instead following ``naturally'' from 3rd factor principles and effects (in the sense of Chomsky 2005). The article thus contributes to the program of eliminating statements in grammar in favor of general factors. More specifically, it develops a theory of C/edge linking in terms of syntactically active but silent C-features, where all referential definite arguments, overt and silent, must match these features in order to be successfully C/edge-linked (interpreted). On the approach pursued, radically silent argu- ments---such as Germanic zero topics and controlled 3rd person null subjects in Finnish---commonly raise across a lexical C (a comple- mentizer or a verb-second (V2) verb) into the edge of the C-domain for the purpose of successful C/edge linking (circumventing C-inter- vention), thereby showing A ̄ -behavior not observed for other types of arguments (including the Romance type of pro). Silent arguments are universally available in syntax, whereas their C/edge linking is con- strained by factors (such as Germanic V2) that may or may not be present or active in individual languages and constructions.}, Author = {Sigur{\dh}sson, Halld{\'o}r {\'A}rmann}, Date-Added = {2011-06-01 08:38:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-06-01 08:39:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {267--304}, Title = {Conditions on Argument Drop}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Delfitto:2011, Abstract = {This article aims at clarifying the role of person at the interface between syntax and the interpretive systems. We argue that first person interpre- tations of third person pronouns (de se readings) stem from the option of leaving the referential index underspecified on the pronoun, thus accounting for the interplay of this phenomenon with the anaphoric usage of first person indexicals (pronoun shifting) and logophoric pro- nouns. The results include proposals on the connection between the semantics of first person and the syntax of the left periphery, a neo- Davidsonian treatment of the semantics of first person indexicals, and a novel view of pronominal anaphora according to which Higgin- botham's (1983) asymmetric relation of linking involves a mechanism of ﰀ-role inheritance tied to the semantics of first person.}, Author = {Delfitto, Denis and Fiorin, Gaetano}, Date-Added = {2011-06-01 08:35:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-06-01 08:37:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {193--224}, Title = {Person Features and Pronominal Anaphora}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @incollection{Bachrach:2009, Author = {Bachrach, Asaf and Katzir, Roni}, Booktitle = {InterPhases: Phase-Theoretic Investigations of Linguistic Interfaces}, Date-Added = {2011-04-06 12:07:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-04-06 12:08:36 -0400}, Editor = {Grohmann, Kleanthes K.}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Right-Node Raising and Delayed Spellout}, Year = {2009}} @incollection{Vries:2011, Author = {de Vries, Mark}, Booktitle = {Ways of Structure Building}, Date-Added = {2011-04-05 08:07:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-04-05 08:08:30 -0400}, Editor = {Uribe-Etxebarria, Myriam and Valmala, Vidal}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Unconventional Mergers}, Year = {to appear}} @inproceedings{Kluck:2008, Author = {Kluck, Marlies}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Console {XVI}}, Date-Added = {2011-04-05 07:58:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-04-05 07:59:58 -0400}, Pages = {77--101}, Title = {Intertwined clauses, interacting propositions. A note on the interpretive aspects of sentence amalgamation.}, Year = {2008}} @article{Ott:2011, Author = {Ott, Dennis}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:31:42 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:32:50 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {183--192}, Title = {A Note on Free Relative Clauses in the Theory of Phases}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{McCarthy:2011, Author = {McCarthy, John J.}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:23:24 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:24:45 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {171--183}, Title = {Perceptually Grounded Faithfulness in {H}armonic {S}erialism}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Larson:2011, Author = {Larson, Bradley}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:19:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:23:21 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {163--171}, Title = {Problems with a Movement Analysis of {R}ight {N}ode {R}aising in {T}agalog}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Kahnemuyipour:2011, Author = {Kahnemuyipour, Arsalan and Megerdoomian, Karine}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:18:49 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:21:15 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {152--162}, Title = {Second-Position Clitics in the vP Phase: The Case of the {A}rmenian Auxiliary}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Heestand:2011, Author = {Heestand, Dustin and Xiang, Ming and Polinsky, Maria}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:17:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:19:35 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {138--152}, Title = {Resumption Still Does Not Rescue Islands}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Cable:2011, Author = {Cable, Seth}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:16:01 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:17:20 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {131--138}, Title = {A New Argument for Lexical Decomposition: Transparent Readings of Verbs}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Gebhardt:2011, Abstract = {Wu and Bodomo (2009) dispute Cheng and Sybesma's (1999, 2005) analysis of Chinese numeral classifiers as being able to function as definite articles. While I agree with Wu and Bodomo's overall conclu- sion, here I focus on parts of their argument that do not stand up to scrutiny and distract from their main point. In particular, I argue that Wu and Bodomo's conclusion that numeral classifiers are lexical items is incorrect. Also, I question their apparent conclusion that the availability of numeral classifiers in a language indicates that that lan- guage's nouns are inherently mass.}, Author = {Gebhardt, Lewis}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:14:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:15:44 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {125--130}, Title = {Classifiers are Functional}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Sportiche:2011, Abstract = {Starting from Kayne's (1976) motivation for the existence of the French que/qui rule based on the complementizer system of French relative clauses, I show that French in fact has a double paradigm of wh-elements, a weak one and a strong one, much like what is found in the (strong/weak) pronominal system. Although only French is discussed here in any detail, such a split seems to have much wider relevance, in other Romance languages, in some Germanic and Scandinavian languages, and beyond (Wolof). This split in turn shows that the que/qui rule (and its cognates) should be looked at differently---in particular, that they should be uncoupled from constraints on subject extraction.}, Author = {Sportiche, Dominique}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:12:54 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:14:01 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {83--124}, Title = {French Relative \emph{Qui}}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Katzir:2011, Abstract = {Agreement and concord involve mismatches between the position where a syntactic or semantic contribution is made and where it is expressed morphologically. Such mismatches are often taken to involve either movement or the spreading and realization of features. I examine a number of superficially different instances of this kind of mismatch that seem to resist an account based on realization and movement alone. I argue that the patterns involved should receive a unified account in terms of licensors, elements subject to a condition of structural economy that associate indirectly with semantically contentful heads through features that those heads spread and that require a c-commanding licensor.}, Author = {Katzir, Roni}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:10:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:12:11 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {45--82}, Title = {Morphosemantic Mismatches, Structural Economy, and Licensing}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Boskovic:2011, Abstract = {The article demonstrates that the rescue-by-PF-deletion account of the amelioration effect of island violations under ellipsis, originally noted by Ross (1969), can be extended to account for the that-trace effect, including the adverb amelioration effect, and the lack of intervention effects with certain null arguments that are otherwise found with their overt counterparts, as well as to deduce the generalizations that traces do not count as interveners for relativized minimality effects and that traces void islandhood. The fact that the rescue-by-PF-deletion analysis makes it possible to unify a number of previously unrelated phe- nomena should be taken as a strong argument in its favor. The current extension of the rescue-by-PF-deletion approach, on which the rescue can arise not only through the deletion process involved in ellipsis but also through regular copy deletion, also accounts for the different behavior of the Superiority Condition and the Wh-Island Condition with respect to the amelioration effect under ellipsis, a surprising difference given that both of these are generally subsumed under relativized minimality effects in current research.}, Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko}, Date-Added = {2011-03-05 13:07:48 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:09:43 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--44}, Title = {Rescue by {PF} Deletion, {T}races as (Non)interveners, and the \emph{That}-{T}race Effect}, Volume = {42}, Year = {2011}} @article{Gabriele:2011, Abstract = {The study investigates whether advanced second language (L2) learners can extend beyond the grammatical properties of the first language (L1) to successfully acquire tense and aspect. We examine the acquisition of the semantics of the imperfective marker te-iru in Japanese by native speakers of Mandarin Chinese, a language that grammatically encodes aspect but not tense. The results of an interpretation task suggest that Chinese learners cannot extend beyond the properties of the L1. However, these results are interpreted in light of a series of related studies that show that Chinese learners can acquire tense and aspect in L2 English and that English native speakers also have difficulty with the imperfective in L2 Japanese. We argue that difficulty with the interpretation of imperfectives in L2 acquisition is not related solely to the properties of the L1, but rather to two properties of the target language: the specific morphological encoding of tense and aspect and the complexity of the semantic computation.}, Author = {Gabriele, Alison and McClure, William}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 10:09:35 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 10:10:50 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39--83}, Title = {Why Some Imperfectives Are Interpreted Imperfectly: A Study of {C}hinese Learners of {J}apanese}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Friedmann:2011, Abstract = {In Hebrew, European Portuguese, Palestinian Arabic, and Spanish, both SV and VS orders are possible. However, when children acquire these languages, they do not use the whole array of word orders in their language at the first stage of sentence construction. Interestingly, their word order preference in the early stage of acquisition differs in the different languages: in Hebrew and European Portuguese they use both SV and VS orders with unaccusative verbs, but only SV with unergative and transitive verbs. In Spanish and Palestinian Arabic, children prefer to use VS order with unaccusative, unergative, and transitive verbs in the first stage. We present 11 experiments and 5 spontaneous speech analyses in the four languages, eliciting these word order patterns in 257 different children, and analyzing the patterns in spontaneous speech in 80 more children. Based on these results we propose an account for these cross-linguistic differences and similarities, according to which children at this stage can already move the verb to I, but cannot move the subject outside of the VP yet. As a result, at this stage the subjects stay within the VP. Whether or not the verb moves to I depends on whether the linear order of SV within the VP can be violated---languages in which children assume IP as the Spell-out domain, Spanish and Palestinian Arabic, allow the verb to appear before the subject, whereas Hebrew and European Portuguese, in which the Spell-out domain is initially taken to be VP, do not allow the verb to move to I until the Spell-out domain widens.}, Author = {Friedmann, Naama and Costa, Jo{\~a}o}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 10:06:36 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 10:08:50 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--38}, Title = {Acquisition of {SV} and {VS} {O}rder in {H}ebrew, {E}uropean {P}ortuguese, {P}alestinian {A}rabic, and {S}panish}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2011}} @article{Soehn:2010, Abstract = {Asthenatureofnegativepolarityitems(NPIs)andtheirlicensingcontexts is still under much debate, a broad empirical basis is an important cornerstone to support further insights in this area of research. The work discussed in this paper is intended as a contribution to realizing this objective. We briefly introduce the phe- nomenon of NPIs and outline major theories about their licensing and also various licensing contexts before discussing our major topics: Firstly, a corpus-based retrieval method for NPI candidates is described that ranks the candidates according to their distributional dependence on the licensing contexts. Our method extracts single-word candidates and is extended to also capture multi-word candidates. The basic idea for automatically collecting NPI candidates from a large corpus is that an NPI behaves like a kind of collocate to its licensing contexts. Manual inspection and interpretation of the candidate lists identify the actual NPIs. Secondly, an online repository for NPIs and other items that show distributional idiosyncrasies is presented, which offers an empirical database for further (theoretical) research on these items in a sustainable way.}, Author = {Soehn, Jan-Philipp and Trawi\'{n}ski, Beata and Lichte, Timm}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 10:03:16 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 10:04:44 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {931--952}, Title = {Spotting, collecting and documenting negative polarity items}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Krifka:2010, Abstract = {The following contribution was inspired by Cleo Condoravdi's article on NPI licensing in temporal clauses (Condoravdi 2010). Condoravdi gives a coherent and comprehensive account of before which crucially involves coercion of proposi- tions to the earliest or maximal times at which the propositions are true, and a modal component for non-factual interpretations. I argue for a non-modal, non-coercive analysis of clauses like [A before B] as `A is the case when B has not been the case', triggering a conversational implicature that B will be the case later. I will also discuss temporal operators involving measure phrases, like three hours before.}, Author = {Krifka, Manfred}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 10:01:50 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 10:02:48 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {911--929}, Title = {\emph{Before} and \emph{After} without coercion: comment on the paper by {C}leo {C}ondoravdi}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Condoravdi:2010, Abstract = {This paper offers a systematic semantically-based approach to NPI licens- ing in temporal clauses based on Beaver and Condoravdi (2003, in progress). It mo- tivates the presuppositional nature of temporal clauses and shows how temporal or- dering induces an ordering of semantic strength in each case. The proposed analysis is uniform across veridical and non-veridical readings of before and brings under the semantic fold seemingly exceptional or pragmatically-based cases of NPI licens- ing observed with after, since and until. Crucial throughout is the more restricted, presupposition-dependent notion of entailment, Strawson entailment, proposed by von Fintel (1999). The paper also relates Strawson entailment to the alternative-based analysis of NPIs by Krifka (1995), proposing a particular kind of contextual update, Strawson update, for calculating informational strength.}, Author = {Condoravdi, Cleo}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 10:00:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 10:01:05 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {877--910}, Title = {{NPI} licensing in temporal clauses}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Giannakidou:2010, Abstract = {In this brief commentary, I consider Hoeksema's data on enig and sug- gest that there is actually no shift from non-veridicality to downward entailment, but rather from weak to strong negative polarity. This shift in distribution comes with a change in intonation, observed often with strong NPIs crosslinguistically (Greek, Korean, Japanese). The path of enig to strong NPI-hood can therefore be regarded as grammaticalizing intonational properties as well. In comparing the older versus more modern usages of Dutch enig, I suggest that the two major sources for NPI-hood known from the literature, scalarity and referential deficiency, may correlate with the weak versus strong NPI distinction. Finally, it is suggested that the distributional change comes with a concomitant meaning shift and the emergence of an additional scalar dimension in the Modern Dutch NPI enig (e.g. via an EVEN component).}, Author = {Giannakidou, Anastasia}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 09:58:56 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 09:59:50 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {861--875}, Title = {The dynamics of change in {D}utch \emph{enig}: from nonveridicality to strong negative polarity}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hoeksema:2010, Abstract = {Incombinationswithsingularcountnouns,theDutchindefinitedeterminer enig `some/any' shows a diachronic distributional shift from nonveridical environ- ments in general to a strict subset thereof, namely negative, conditional and interrog- ative contexts. Similarities with Greek indefinites of the kanenas-series are explored, and an argument is given that at some point enig has split into two uses, one of which is currently on its way out. Nonemphatic, nonreferring enig is disappearing, whereas emphatic enig is stable within a set of environments similar to those of English any or ever.}, Author = {Hoeksema, Jack}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 09:57:15 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 09:58:15 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {837--859}, Title = {Dutch \emph{ENIG}: from nonveridicality to downward entailment}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Biberauer:2010, Abstract = {This response focuses on two synchronic and two diachronic issues raised by Agnes J{\"a}ger's contribution to this volume. On the synchronic front, we take a closer look at the limits of the featural underspecification approach adopted by J{\"a}ger, arguing for the need to draw a featural distinction between ``ordinary'' indefinites and positive polarity items, and also highlighting that the [affective] feature appears to play a rather central role not only in the domain of indefinites, but also beyond. In the diachronic domain, we briefly take issue with the feasibility of constraint reranking as an explanation for change, and then turn to a consideration of how a reinterpre- tation of Roberts and Roussou's (2003) analysis of ``increasing negativity'' may be captured in terms of an Agree-based system (cf. Biberauer and Roberts 2010b). Like J{\"a}ger's proposed system, this alternative does not predict that indefinite-related de- velopments should always be unidirectional, as has sometimes been supposed (cf. i.a. also Hoeksema 2010).}, Author = {Biberauer, Theresa and Roberts, Ian}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 09:55:11 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 09:56:41 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {823--836}, Title = {Comments on J{\"a}ger ``\emph{Anything} is \emph{nothing} is \emph{something}'': on the diachrony of polarity types of indefinites}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Jager:2010, Abstract = {Three main types of syntactic contexts and accordingly three types of in- definites may be distinguished with respect to negation and polarity. This paper in- vestigates diachronic changes of indefinites from one polarity type to another. A dis- cussion of the development of the indefinites in German illustrates the effect these changes may have on the entire indefinite system of a language and crucially pro- vides evidence for changes towards both `more negative' as well as `more positive'. Additional data from a wide range of languages further supports the conclusion that polarity-type changes are not unidirectional. The observed changes are analyzed in terms of lexical underspecification theory as the result of one of only two possible diachronic operations: introduction of a plus-valued feature or complete loss of a feature in the lexical entries of the respective indefinites.}, Author = {J{\"a}ger, Agnes}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 09:53:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 09:54:35 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {787--822}, Title = {\emph{Anything} is \emph{nothing} is \emph{something}}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Penka:2010, Abstract = {This introduction addresses some key issues and questions in the study of negation and polarity. Focussing on negative polarity and negative indefinites, it summarizes research trends and results. Special attention is paid to the issues of syn- chronic variation and diachronic change in the realm of negative polarity items, which figure prominently in the articles and commentaries contained in this special issue.}, Author = {Penka, Doris and Zeijlstra, Hedde}, Date-Added = {2011-02-22 09:51:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-02-22 09:52:30 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {771--786}, Title = {Negation and Polarity: an introduction}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @incollection{Grice:1989, Author = {Grice, Paul}, Booktitle = {Studies in the Way of Words}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 18:13:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 18:15:17 -0500}, Pages = {22--40}, Publisher = {Harvard University Press}, Title = {Logic and Conversation}, Year = {1989}} @incollection{Bolinger:1979, Address = {New York}, Author = {Bolinger, Dwight}, Booktitle = {Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 17:01:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 17:06:01 -0500}, Editor = {Giv{\'o}n, Talmy}, Pages = {289--309}, Publisher = {Academic Press}, Title = {Pronouns in Discourse}, Year = {1979}} @incollection{Heim:1991b, Address = {Berlin}, Author = {Heim, Irene}, Booktitle = {Semantik: Ein internationales {H}andbuch der zeitgenossischen {F}orschung}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 16:43:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 16:45:11 -0500}, Pages = {487--535}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Title = {Artikel und Definitheit}, Year = {1991}} @inproceedings{Kanzanina:2001, Address = {Somerville, Massachusetts}, Author = {Kanzanina, Nina and Phillips, Colin}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 25th Boston University Conference on Language Development}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 16:01:23 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 16:03:23 -0500}, Editor = {Do, Anna H.-J. and Dom{\'\i}nguez and Johansen, Aimee}, Pages = {413--424}, Publisher = {Cascadilla Press}, Title = {Coreference in child {R}ussian: Distinguishing syntactic and discourse constraints}, Year = {2001}} @article{Lust:1980, Author = {Lust, Barbara and Loveland, Katherine A. and Kornet, R.}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:59:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 16:01:00 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Analysis}, Pages = {359--391}, Title = {The Development of Anaphora in First Language: Syntactic and Pragmatic Constraints}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1980}} @inproceedings{Crain:1986, Address = {Amherst, Massachusetts}, Author = {Crain, Stephen and McKee, Cecil}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of {N}orth {E}ast {L}inguistics {S}ociety 16}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:53:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 15:58:54 -0500}, Editor = {Berman, Stephen and Choe, Jae--Woong and McDonough, Joyce}, Organization = {Graduate Linguistic Student Association}, Pages = {94--110}, Title = {The Acquisition of Structural Restrictions on Anaphora}, Year = {1986}} @article{Lust:1992, Author = {Lust, Barbara and Eisele, Julie and Mazuka, Reiko}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:51:55 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 15:53:15 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Pages = {333--358}, Title = {The Binding Theory Module: Evidence from First Language Acquisition for Principle {C}}, Volume = {68}, Year = {1992}} @article{McDaniel:1990, Author = {McDaniel, Dana and Cairns, Helen Smith and Hsu, Jennifer}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:50:16 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 15:51:47 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Pages = {121--139}, Title = {Binding Principles in the Grammars of young Children}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1990}} @article{Runner:2003a, Author = {Runner, Jeffre and Sussman, Rachel S. and Tanenhaus, Michael K.}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:48:45 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 15:50:10 -0500}, Journal = {Cognition}, Pages = {B1--B13}, Title = {Assignment of reference to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases: Evidence from eye-movements}, Volume = {89}, Year = {2003}} @book{Solan:1983, Author = {Solan, Lawrence}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:47:42 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 15:48:41 -0500}, Publisher = {Dordrecht: Reidel}, Title = {Pronominal Reference: Child Language and the theory of grammar}, Year = {1983}} @article{Guasti:1999, Author = {Guasti, Maria Teresa and Chierchia, Gennaro}, Date-Added = {2011-01-22 15:46:48 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 15:47:38 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Pages = {129--170}, Title = {Reconstruction in Child Grammar}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1999/2000}} @article{Schlenker:2004a, Author = {Schlenker, Philippe}, Date-Added = {2011-01-16 21:40:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-16 21:45:33 -0500}, Journal = {Italian Journal of Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {155--218}, Title = {Person and {B}inding: A Partial Survey}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2004}} @inproceedings{Stechow:2003, Address = {Amherst, Massachusetts}, Author = {Stechow, Arnim von}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society}, Date-Added = {2011-01-16 21:37:06 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-16 21:39:32 -0500}, Editor = {Kadowaki, Makoto and Kawahara, Shigeto}, Organization = {Graduate Linguistic Student Association}, Pages = {377--403}, Publisher = {University of Massachusetts at Amherst}, Title = {Feature deletion under semantic binding}, Volume = {33}, Year = {2003}} @inproceedings{Partee:1989a, Address = {Chicago Illinois}, Author = {Partee, Barbara}, Booktitle = {Papers from the 25th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Part One}, Date-Added = {2011-01-16 21:21:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-16 21:24:08 -0500}, Editor = {Wiltshire, Caroline R. and Graczyk, Randolph and Music, Bradley}, Organization = {Chicago Linguistics Society}, Pages = {342--365}, Publisher = {University of Chicago}, Title = {Binding implicit variables in quantified contexts.}, Year = {1989}} @article{Hiraiwa:2010, Abstract = {This article aims to elucidate the true nature of the so-called Double-o Constraint (DoC) in Japanese. The nature of the DoC has long been discussed in the literature since Harada's work back in the 1970's, but it has eluded a principled explanation. The DoC has been known to apply to certain domains and a careful study presented in this article shows that these domains correspond to phases. Thus, the DoC reduces to a PF constraint against realizing multiple occurrences of the accusative Case value within a single Spell-Out domain. Specifically, I argue that the DoC applies cyclically phase-by-phase and thus that the DoC provides solid evidence for the cyclic phase-based computation in the current minimalist theorizing (Chomsky 2001, 2004, 2008). If correct, Case in Japanese has two facets: a Case is valued in narrow syntax but its value is only realized at Spell-Out, at which point PF interface conditions apply. It is further suggested that the DoC reduces to a syntactic OCP (Obligatory Contour Principle). The DoC, therefore, is considered to be a case in which an apparently language-particular and hence peripheral phenomenon provides empirical support for the architecture of the Universal Grammar.}, Author = {Hiraiwa, Ken}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 14:28:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 14:29:15 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {723--770}, Title = {Spelling out the {D}ouble-\emph{o} {C}onstraint}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Heck:2010, Abstract = {Southern Tiwa (Tanoan) exhibits agreement with up to three arguments (ergative, absolutive, dative). This agreement is subject to certain restrictions resembling the Person-Case Constraint paradigm (Bonet 1991). Moreover, there is a cor- relation between agreement restrictions and conditions on (the obviation of) noun- incorporation in Southern Tiwa, as explicitly and elegantly captured by Rosen (1990) in terms of a heterogeneous feature hierarchy and rules of association. We attempt to recast Rosen's central insights in terms of Anagnostopoulou's probe-sharing model of Person-Case Constraint effects (Anagnostopoulou 2003, 2006), to show that the full range of Southern Tiwa agreement and (non-)incorporation restrictions can be given a single, unified analysis within the probe-goal-Agree framework of Chomsky (2001). In particular, we argue that Southern Tiwa's triple-agreement system is characterized by (a) an independent class probe located on the heads T and v, and (b) a rule that allows this class probe to be deleted in the context of local-person T- agreement. The various restrictions on agreement and non-incorporation then reduce to a single source: failure of class-valuation with DP (as opposed to NP) arguments.}, Author = {Heck, Fabian and Richards, Marc}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 14:26:48 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 14:27:46 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {681--721}, Title = {A probe-goal approach to agreement and non-incorporation restrictions in {S}outhern {T}iwa}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Pajak:2010, Abstract = {Bakovic ́ (2005) analyzes the avoidance of `sufficiently similar' adjacent consonants as the interaction of independent antigemination and assimilation processes. We present evidence from the phonology of monoconsonantal proclitics in Polish in support of the primary consequence of this analysis, that any conditions on antigemination or assimilation will also be conditions on `sufficient similarity' avoidance. These conditions concern the segmental contexts in which geminates are disallowed in Polish and the variability of one of the assimilation processes involved. The analysis is further corroborated by the coincidence of two changes in progress: as the rate of variable assimilation has gone down, so has the rate of `sufficient similarity' avoidance.}, Author = {Pajak, Bozena and Bakovi{\'c}, Eric}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 14:23:58 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 14:31:04 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {643--680}, Title = {Assimilation, antigemination, and contingent optionality: The phonology of monoconsonantal proclitics in {P}olish}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Baker:2010, Abstract = {Two distinct ideas about how morphological case is assigned exist in the recent generative literature: the standard Chomskyan view that case is assigned by designated functional heads to the closest NP via an agreement relationship, and an alternative view in which case is assigned to one NP if there is a second NP in the same local domain (Marantz 1991). We claim that these two ways of assigning case are complementary, based on data from the Turkic language Sakha. Accusative case and dative case in this language are assigned by Marantz-style configurational rules that do not refer directly to functional categories. This is shown by evidence from passives, agentive nominalizations, subject raising, possessor raising, and case assignment in PPs. In contrast, there is evidence that nominative and genitive are as- signed by functional heads in the Chomskyan way, as shown by the distribution of nominative case and the relationship between case marking and agreement. The two methods of case assignment thus coexist, not only in Universal Grammar, but even in the grammar of a single language.}, Author = {Baker, Mark C. and Vinokurova, Nadya}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 14:21:39 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 14:22:37 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {593--642}, Title = {Two modalities of case assignment: case in {S}akha}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Arregi:2010, Abstract = {Split questions such as What tree did John plant, an oak? contain a wh-question part and a tag. Drawing on Spanish, Basque and English data, this article argues that these two parts of a split question are independent clauses. The tag is in fact an elliptical non-wh-question, where ellipsis is licensed in the same way as in other sentence fragments. I provide detailed argumentation that the tag involves movement of a correlate of the wh-phrase, followed by ellipsis of the remnant, thus contributing to the growing body of evidence that sentence fragments (sluicing, fragment answers, etc.) are syntactically full clauses. The syntax proposed provides a simple account of the intonation patterns found in split questions and of their semantics. Furthermore, it is argued that the only existing alternative analysis of split questions cannot account for many of the properties of this construction.}, Author = {Arregi, Karlos}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 14:01:58 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 14:20:58 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {539--592}, Title = {Ellipsis in split questions}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Albright:2010, Author = {Albright, Adam}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 14:00:27 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 14:01:55 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {475--537}, Title = {Base-driven leveling in {Y}iddish verb paradigms}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Rivero:2010, Author = {Rivero, Mar{\'\i}a Luisa and Arregui, Ana and Frackowiak, Ewelina}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:53:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:54:46 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {704--714}, Title = {Variation in Circumstantial Modality: {P}olish versus {S}t'{\'a}t'imcets}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Larson:2010, Author = {Larson, Richard K.}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:49:52 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:50:36 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {701--704}, Title = {On Pykk{\"a}nen's Semantics for Low Applicatives}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Drummond:2010, Author = {Drummond, Alex and Hornstein, Norbert and Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:48:24 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:49:17 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {689--692}, Title = {A Puzzle about {P}-Stranding and a Possible Solution}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Clifton:2010, Author = {Clifton, Charles, Jr. and Frazier, Lyn}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:46:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:47:56 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {681--689}, Title = {When Are Downward-Entailing Contexts Identified? The Csae of the Domain Widener \emph{ever}}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Koizumi:2010, Abstract = {The question of whether the subject stays in its thematic position within the VP or moves to Spec,TP is difficult to answer with respect to free word order languages such as Japanese because the surface constituent orders in these languages do not necessarily provide sufficient information to determine syntactic positions. In this article, we present psycho-linguistic evidence for the theoretical hypothesis that, in Japanese, the subject must move to Spec,TP in sentences with the subject-object- verb word order, but may stay within the VP in sentences with the object-subject-verb word order.}, Author = {Koizumi, Masatoshi and Tamaoka, Katsuo}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:45:03 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:46:11 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {663--680}, Title = {Psycholinguistic Evidence for the {VP}-Internal Subject Position in {J}apanese}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Heinz:2010, Abstract = {This article shows that specific properties of long-distance phonotactic patterns derived from consonantal harmony patterns (Hansson 2001, Rose and Walker 2004) follow from a learner that generalizes only on the basis of the order of sounds, not the distance between them. The proposed learner is simple, efficient, and provably correct, and does not require an a priori notion of tier or projection (contra the model in Hayes and Wilson 2008); nor does it rely on the additional structure provided by Optimality Theory grammars (Prince and Smolensky 1993, 2004) or grammars in the principles-and-parameters framework (Chomsky 1981, Dresher and Kaye 1990, Gibson and Wexler 1994). Not only does the noncounting nature of nonlocal dependencies automatically follow from the way the learner generalizes, it also explains the absence of blocking patterns from the typology. Finally, the learner lends support to the idea that long-distance phonotactic patterns are phenomenologically distinct from spreading patterns, contra the hypothesis of Strict Locality (Gafos 1999, et seq.).}, Author = {Heinz, Jeffrey}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:43:46 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:44:32 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {623--661}, Title = {Learning Long-Distance Phonotactics}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Haegeman:2010a, Abstract = {By analogy with the movement analysis of temporal clauses, some authors have proposed that conditional clauses be derived by leftward operator movement (Bhatt and Pancheva 2002, 2006, Arsenijevic ́ 2009, Tomaszewicz 2009). This movement analysis of conditional clauses is shown to account for the incompatibility of main clause phenomena and conditional clauses in terms of intervention effects. The cartographic implementation of this analysis predicts that conditional clauses will be incompatible with speaker-oriented modal expressions and that conditional clauses will lack the low-construal reading found in temporal clauses (Bhatt and Pancheva 2002, 2006). Thus, the absence of low construal in conditional clauses, which was initially taken to be an obstacle for the movement account of conditional clauses (see Citko 2000), becomes an argument in its favor.}, Author = {Haegeman, Liliane}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:35:08 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:43:17 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {595--621}, Title = {The Movement Derivation of Conditional Clauses}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Bruening:2010a, Abstract = {This article discusses three asymmetries in ditransitives---quantifier scope, nominalizations, and idioms---and argues that an asymmetric theory like that advocated by Marantz (1993) and Bruening (2001) is correct. A symmetric theory like that proposed by Harley (1997, 2002) cannot account for the asymmetries. The article also proposes a com- plete theory of idiom formation based on selection. It also proposes a formal semantics for double object constructions that includes a mechanism for composing complex predicates. This semantics can account for the different readings of again and other modifiers, and can also be extended to nonalternating verbs like deny, spare, envy, and cost, with correct predictions about their behavior.}, Author = {Bruening, Benjamin}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:32:49 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:33:39 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {519--562}, Title = {Ditransitive Asymmetries and a Theory of Idiom Formation}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Vicente:2010a, Author = {Vicente, Luis}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:12:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:13:43 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {509--517}, Title = {A Note on the Movement Analysis of {G}apping}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Rezac:2010, Author = {Rezac, Milan}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:11:23 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:12:26 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {496--508}, Title = {$\phi$-Agree Versus $\phi$-Feature Movement: Evidence from Floating Quantifiers}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Costantini:2010, Author = {Costantini, Fracesco}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:08:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:10:50 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {487--496}, Title = {On Infinitives and Floating Quantification}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hazout:2010, Abstract = {Present tense verbless sentences involve a full clausal structure and not a reduced structure of the kind familiar under the term small clause. This article presents two new arguments in favor of this view. These arguments are based on differences between root verbless sentences and familiar instances of small clauses (rather than on similarities between present tense verbless sentences and verbal sentences in other tenses, as in Benmamoun 2008). The arguments presented in this article provide substantial evidence bearing on the fundamental issue of what a clausal structure needs to have in order to qualify as an independent nonelliptical utterance.}, Author = {Hazout, Ilan}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:07:29 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:08:24 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {471--485}, Title = {Verbless Sentences and Clause Structure}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Torrego:2010, Abstract = {Taking Folli and Harley's (2007) analysis of Italian fare-causatives as a starting point, and focusing on Spanish, I examine variation in the distribution of the subject of the embedded infinitive in so-called faire-causatives, and I suggest that there is a robust correlation between the size of the embedded complement and the licensing of particular arguments. I reach this conclusion by investigating syntactic complexity in the domain of hacer-causatives, showing that richer structures obtain when Case factors associated with dative-case-marked arguments are considered. I further show that the specific conditions imposed by these arguments are language particular and arise in the language independently of analytical causatives.}, Author = {Torrego, Esther}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:05:54 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:06:52 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {445--470}, Title = {Variability in the Case Patterns of Causative Formation in {R}omance and Its Implications}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Pescarini:2010, Abstract = {This article focuses on sequences of Romance clitics wherein a pro- nominal form is replaced by another clitic exponent, which is prima facie morphologically unmotivated. Bonet (1991) and Harris (1994) among others have argued that these synthetic clusters can be due to the insertion of an elsewhere clitic: a default, nonspecified item that is inserted as a last resort whenever the insertion of other clitics is ruled out. In this article, independent pieces of evidence gathered from Italian and Italian dialects are shown to support this hypothesis.}, Author = {Pescarini, Diego}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:04:14 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:05:15 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {427--444}, Title = {Elsewhere in {R}omance: Evidence from Clitic Clusters}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{McFadden:2010, Abstract = {In this article, we investigate the peculiar distribution of the auxiliaries have and be in Earlier English and its consequences for theories of the perfect and auxiliary selection. We argue on the basis of a large-scale corpus study that the periphrastic construction with be was restricted to a stative resultative interpretation, whereas that with have developed a wider range of uses, crucially including the experiential perfect in addition to resultatives. Support comes from comparing the Earlier English patterns with related ones in Norwegian and German for which native-speaker judgments are available. On the basis of this insight, we propose distinct formal analyses for the two constructions and show how they account for the attested patterns and changes in Middle and Early Modern English. Of particular theoretical relevance is the premise that what has been called the ``perfect'' is not a homogeneous, monolithic category, and that certain kinds of variation can only be understood by teasing apart the pieces involved. Earlier English and German auxiliaries have distinct distributions because their ``perfects'' have distinct syntactic and semantic makeups.}, Author = {McFadden, Thomas and Alexiadou, Artemis}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 11:00:22 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:03:36 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {389--425}, Title = {Perfects, Resultatives, and Auxiliaries in {E}arlier {E}nglish}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Landau:2010a, Abstract = {Although they participate in control relations, implicit arguments are standardly viewed as unprojected theta-roles, absent from the syntax. I challenge this view and argue that implicit arguments are syntactically represented. The argument rests on the observation that implicit arguments can exercise partial control, and the claim that partial control must be encoded in the syntax (given plausible assumptions on the limits of lexical relations). I further argue that the syntactic constitution of implicit arguments is more impoverished than that of pro, explaining their differential visibility to various syntactic processes.}, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2010-12-17 10:58:40 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 10:59:30 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {357--388}, Title = {The Explicit Syntax of Implicit Arguments}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Schutze:2010, Abstract = {This paper examines two issues concerning nonagreeing don't in child English, e.g., He don't fit. (1) Do children know that don't consists of auxiliary do plus sentential negation, or do they misanalyze it simply as negation? I argue that the former claim yields both empirical (distributional) and conceptual advantages, while the latter does not explain what it was designed to explain. (2) If it is not misanalyzed, why does this form fail to agree? I consider two accounts that assume it is part of the Root Infinitive stage---one based on a missed parameter involving how agreement is spelled out (Guasti & Rizzi 2002), and the other based on underspecification of Infl features in syntax (my alternative proposal)---and explore their divergent predictions. I argue that the underspecification approach requires fewer stipulations about how children differ from adults, particularly for capturing do-omissions in ``medial neg'' environments.}, Author = {Sch{\"u}tze, Carson}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 19:00:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 19:01:40 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {235--271}, Title = {The Status of Nonagreeing \emph{Don't} and Theories of Root Infinitives}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Kline:2010, Abstract = {Researchers have long debated the mechanisms underlying the learning of syntactic structure. Of significant interest has been the fact that passive constructions appear to be learned earlier in Sesotho than English. This paper provides a comprehensive, quantitative analysis of the passive input Sesotho-speaking children hear, how it differs from English input, and the implications for learning the passive. The findings indicate that the more frequent use of both the passive and the by-phrase in Sesotho child-directed speech, in conjunction with the non-ambiguous passive morpheme, may together facilitate earlier access to thematic roles (agent, patient), thereby promoting early implicit learning of the passive. The implications for the acquisition of syntactic structure more generally are discussed.}, Author = {Kline, Melissa and Demuth, Katherine}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:59:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 19:00:11 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {220--234}, Title = {Factors Facilitating Implicit Learning: The Case of the {S}esotho Passive}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Gavarro:2010, Abstract = {The literature generally assumes that object clitic omission is equally allowed in all child languages. In this paper we challenge this claim by means of an elicitation experiment carried out with children acquiring two closely related languages, Catalan and Spanish. Our results show that while omission is high in young Catalan-speaking children, it is very low in Spanish-speaking children. We argue that this difference can be attributed to a property of their respective grammars (the presence or otherwise of past participle agreement when objects cliticize) under the Unique Checking Constraint of Wexler (1998). In a second experiment, we confirm the robustness of early sensitivity to past participle agreement; through a grammaticality judgment task we find a statistically significant difference between the two languages. We show that the parametric approach postulated can be extended, for mandatory, overt objects, beyond Catalan and Spanish, broadening the empirical scope of the Unique Checking Constraint.}, Author = {Gavarr{\'o}, Anna and Torrens, Vicen{\c c} and Wexler, Ken}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:56:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:58:19 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {192--219}, Title = {Object Clitic Omission: Two Language Types}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Minai:2010, Abstract = {Research on children's computation of meanings involving the focus operator only has provided an equivocal conclusion as to whether children's semantic representation of only is adult-like. The present study discusses the importance of assessing children's knowledge about only in light of its semantic interaction with other logical words in a sentence. The meaning of only involves two components, each of which affects the interpretation of another logical word, such as the scalar term some, in a sentence containing only. Demonstrating that young children are sensitive to the interaction among only and some would suggest that children possess adult-like knowledge of the lexical semantics of only. We report a new experiment that examines children's interpretation of sentences involving only and some, revealing that children indeed do not ignore the contribution of only when interpreting sentences with only and some.}, Author = {Minai, Utako and Fiorentino, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:54:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:55:46 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {183--190}, Title = {The Role of the Focus Operator \emph{only} in Children's Computation of Sentence Meaning}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hodgson:2010, Abstract = {This article presents a study of a between-subjects design experiment on the comprehension of telicity in simple telic predicates (e.g., John filled the bucket) and locatum predicates (e.g., the water filled the bucket) in L1 Spanish. Weist, Wysocka, and Lyytinen (1991) for English and Finnish, and Van Hout (1997, 1998b) for English and Dutch have shown that children up to age 6;06 allow simple telic predicates to have both telic and atelic interpretations. The main objective of this article is to show that children aged 3;09 allow locatum structures to be interpreted as telic, like adults, but allow simple telic predicates to have telic and atelic interpretations. The central claim is that in simple telic predicates, telicity is checked by covert movement, while in locatum predicates, telicity is checked by overt movement. Children misinterpret simple telic predicates because covert movement is an operation that takes place after the branching off to the PF component, but perform like adults when overt movement is involved.}, Author = {Hodgson, Miren}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:52:27 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:53:51 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {155--182}, Title = {Locatum Structures and the Acquisition of Telicity}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Gruter:2010, Abstract = {While L1 transfer and L2 learnability have been studied extensively in the domain of syntax and the syntax/semantics interface, purely semantic phenomena have received little attention in the L2 literature. This paper presents two experiments examining the relative scope assigned to disjunction and negation by English-speaking learners of Japanese (Experiment 1) and Japanese-speaking learners of English (Experiment 2). Previous evidence from L1 acquisition shows a protracted initial default for the interpretation of the relative scope of disjunction and negation. Our results show no such default in L2 acquisition, contra the predictions of Epstein et al. (1996). Instead, we find evidence of L1 transfer, suggesting `Full Transfer' at the L2 initial state extends to the domain of semantics. Results also show uneven success in the two L2 groups, which is explained through the different learnability scenarios that arise as a result of transfer and the availability of positive evidence in the L2 input.}, Author = {Gr{\"u}ter, Theres and Lieberman, Moti and Gualmini, Andrea}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:50:09 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:51:49 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {127--154}, Title = {Acquiring the Scope of Disjunction and negation in {L2}: A Bidirectional Study of Learners of {J}apanese and {E}nglish}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Ruys:2010, Abstract = {It has recently been claimed (Hazout 2004) that the English expletives it and there do not differ in their theta-properties. This paper argues that Dutch het and er do differ: all instances of het bear a (quasi-)theta-role; no instance of er does. Evidence comes from an analysis of expletive selection in constructions with seem-type verbs.}, Author = {Ruys, E. G.}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:44:58 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:45:45 -0500}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {141--178}, Title = {Expletive selection and {CP} arguments in {D}utch}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Corver:2010, Abstract = {We discuss ellipsis of the possessee in both pronominal possessor constructions (Dutch: zijn boek `his book') and possessor doubling constructions (Dutch: John z'n boek, John his book `John's book') from a micro-comparative perspective. More specifically we show, on the basis of an in-depth study of the nominal system of 57 Dutch dialects, that there are two types of possessee ellipsis. In the first type there is a pro which needs to be licensed by gender agreement. In the second type there is an overt pro-form, similar to English one, and hence no ellipsis. Dialects that have the first type of possessee ellipsis can be further divided into two subtypes. The first has gender agreement on the possessive pronoun, the second one does not. Interestingly, possessee ellipsis can take place in the possessor doubling construction only in the former subtype of dialect. We implement this striking generalization by arguing that in the latter type of dialect pro has to move to Spec,DP in order to be licensed. The doubling possessor also has to be merged in Spec,DP. As a consequence, pro and a doubling possessor cannot co-occur and hence possessee ellipsis and possessor doubling are incompatible. In the former type of dialect, i.e., those dialects that do express gender on the possessive pronoun, pro can be licensed by the gender agreement on the possessive pronoun in a position lower than Spec,DP. Hence, in these dialects Spec,DP is available for a doubling possessor and, consequently, possessee ellipsis and possessor doubling can co-occur.}, Author = {Corver, Norbert and Koppen, Marjo van}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:42:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:43:54 -0500}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {99--140}, Title = {Ellipsis in {D}utch possessive noun phrases: a micro-comparative approach}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Roehrs:2010, Abstract = {This paper investigates the demonstrative-reinforcer construction, combinations of a demonstrative and a (usually) adverbial element, in the different Germanic and Romance languages. Documenting that there are four different types, I argue that demonstratives are phrasal elements that are merged in the Specifier position of an intermediate phrase. Depending in part on the different inner makeup, demonstratives may or must move to Spec,DP. Furthermore, reinforcers come in two types: `bare' reinforcers are merged in the same Specifier as demonstratives; PP- reinforcers are right-adjoined. Assuming that there is no Subextraction out of Specifiers or Adjuncts, we can also explain a number of patterns that, although logically conceivable, do not occur in any language.}, Author = {Roehrs, Dorian}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:40:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:41:43 -0500}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {225--268}, Title = {Demonstrative-reinforer constructions}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Caha:2010, Abstract = {I investigate the locative-directional alternation in German, expressed by the change of case on the complement of a preposition, and its consequences for the theory of case in general. I argue that oblique cases and structural cases are assigned in a uniform manner, but they are distinct in the amount of functional structure: oblique case contains structural case. Follow- ing Starke (2005), I claim that oblique cases can be promoted to structural cases by stranding layers of oblique case.}, Author = {Caha, Pavel}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:38:31 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:40:39 -0500}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {179--223}, Title = {The {G}erman locative-directional alternation: A Peeling Account}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @book{Bowers:2010, Author = {Bowers, John}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:30:55 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:31:17 -0500}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Arguments ad Relations}, Year = {2010}} @book{Embick:2010, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Embick, David}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:29:42 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:46:25 +0000}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Localism versus Globalism in Morphology and Phonology}, Year = {2010}} @book{Richards:2010, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Richards, Norvin}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:28:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2012-02-19 17:45:47 +0000}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Uttering Trees}, Year = {2010}} @book{Landau:2010, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:27:28 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:28:03 -0500}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {The Locative Syntax of Experiencers}, Year = {2010}} @book{Cinque:2010, Author = {Cinque, Guglielmo}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:26:35 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:27:13 -0500}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {The Syntax of Adjectives: A Comparative Study}, Year = {2010}} @book{Roberts:2010, Author = {Roberts, Ian}, Date-Added = {2010-12-05 18:25:46 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-05 18:26:22 -0500}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Agreement and Head Movement: Clitics, Incorporation, and Defective Goals}, Year = {2010}} @book{Pylkkanen:2008, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Pylkk{\"a}nen, Liina}, Date-Added = {2010-11-10 16:44:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-11-10 16:46:45 -0500}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Introducing Arguments}, Year = {2008}} @inproceedings{Levinson:2005, Address = {Philadelphia, Pennsylvania}, Author = {Levinson, Lisa}, Booktitle = {The 28th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium (Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 11.1)}, Date-Added = {2010-11-10 08:08:18 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-11-10 08:10:10 -0500}, Editor = {Arunachalam, Sudha and Scheffler, Tatjana and Sundaresan, Sandhya and Tauberer, Joshua}, Organization = {University of Pennsylvania}, Pages = {155--168}, Title = {`To' in two places in the dative alternation}, Year = {2005}} @article{Hovav:2008, Abstract = {We challenge the predominant view of the English dative alternation, which takes all alternating verbs to have two meanings: a caused possession meaning realized by the double object variant and a caused motion meaning realized by the to variant. Instead, we argue that verbs like give and sell only have a caused possession meaning, while verbs like throw and send have both caused motion and caused possession meanings. We show that the caused possession meaning may be realized by both variants. Concomitantly, we argue that verbs like give, even in the to variant, lack a conceptual path constituent, and instead have a caused possession meaning which can be understood as the bringing about of a `have' relation. We reassess evidence for alternative approaches adduced from inference patterns and verb--argument combinations and demonstrate how our verb-sensitive analysis, when combined with an account of variant choice, provides a more insightful explanation of this data, while having wider coverage. Our investigation affirms proposals that a verb's own meaning plays a key role in determining its argument realization options. To conclude, we consider the crosslinguistic implications of our study, attempting to explain why so many languages lack a true dative alternation.}, Author = {Hovav, Malka Rappaport and Levin, Beth}, Date-Added = {2010-11-10 07:59:31 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-11-10 08:05:58 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {129--167}, Title = {The {E}nglish dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity}, Volume = {44}, Year = {2008}} @book{Halliday:1976, Author = {Halliday, Michael and Hasan, Ruqiaya}, Date-Added = {2010-11-22 14:54:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-11-22 14:56:02 -0500}, Publisher = {Longmans}, Title = {Cohesion in {E}nglish}, Year = {1976}} @unpublished{Fox:2009, Author = {Fox, Danny and Pesetsky, David}, Date-Added = {2010-09-29 16:19:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-09-29 16:20:15 -0400}, Month = {July}, Note = {talk delivered at Ben Gurion University}, Title = {Rightward Movement, Covert Movement, and Cyclic Linearization}, Year = {2009}} @incollection{Sternefeld:2001, Author = {Sternefeld, Wolfgang}, Booktitle = {Audiatur Vox Sapientiae. A Festschrift for {A}rnim von {S}techow}, Date-Added = {2010-09-29 11:08:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-09-29 11:10:02 -0400}, Editor = {F{\'e}ry, Caroline and Sternefeld, Wolfgang}, Publisher = {Acadamie Verlag}, Title = {Partial Movement Constructions, Pied-Piping and Higher Order Choice Functions}, Year = {2001}} @article{Cable:2010a, Abstract = {I argue that pied-piping, as traditionally understood, might not exist. I reanalyze classic examples from English and other well-studied languages in light of new data from Tlingit, an understudied and endangered language of Alaska. I argue that the initial appearance of pied- piping in Tlingit is misleading and actually reflects structures where no true pied-piping occurs. I then show that a similar analysis is possible for putative cases of pied-piping in other, well-known languages. Consequently, both the phenomenon of pied-piping and the grammatical mechanisms introduced to derive it might be eliminable from the theory of grammar.}, Author = {Cable, Seth}, Date-Added = {2010-09-29 10:58:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-12-17 11:42:07 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {563--594}, Title = {Against the Existence of {P}ied-{P}iping: Evidence from {T}lingit}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @book{Cable:2010, Author = {Cable, Seth}, Date-Added = {2010-09-29 10:54:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-09-29 10:55:57 -0400}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The Grammar of {Q}: {Q}-Particles, {W}h-{M}ovement and {P}ied-{P}iping}, Year = {2010}} @incollection{Abney:1996, Author = {Abney, Steven}, Booktitle = {The Balancing Act: Combining Symbolic and Statistical Approaches to Language}, Date-Added = {2010-09-07 07:15:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-09-07 07:17:11 -0400}, Editor = {Klavans, Judith and Resnik, Philip}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Statistical Methods and Linguistics}, Year = {1996}} @article{Zuraw:2010, Abstract = {This paper presents a case of patterned exceptionality. The case is Tagalog nasal substitution, a phenomenon in which a prefix-final nasal fuses with a stem-initial obstruent. The rule is variable on a word-by-word basis, but its distribution is phonologically patterned, as shown through dictionary and corpus data. Speakers appear to have implicit knowledge of the patterning, as shown through experimental data and loan adaptation. A grammar is proposed that reconciles the primacy of lexical information with regularities in the distribution of the rule. Morphologically complex words are allowed to have their own lexical entries, whose use is preferred to on-the-fly morphological concatenation. The grammar contains lower-ranked markedness constraints that govern the behavior of novel words. Faithfulness for lexicalized full words is ranked high, so that an established word will have a stable pronunciation. But when a word is newly coined through affixation, the outcome varies according the lexical trends. A crucial aspect of the proposal is that the ranking of the ''subterranean'' markedness constraints can be learned despite training data in which all words are pronounced faithfully, using Boersma's (1997, 1998) Gradual learning algorithm. The paper also shows, by summarizing the rule's behavior in related languages, that the same constraints, in different rankings, seem to be at work even in languages reported to lack variation.}, Author = {Zuraw, Kie}, Date-Added = {2010-07-02 10:44:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-07-02 10:45:58 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {417--472}, Title = {A model of lexical variation and the grammar with application to {T}agalog nasal substitution}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Vicente:2010, Abstract = {A series of studies have distinguished two types of but, namely, corrective and counterexpectational. The difference between these two types has been considered largely semantic/pragmatic. This article shows that the semantic difference also translates into a different syntax for each type of but. More precisely, corrective but always requires clause-level coordination, with apparent counterexamples being derived through ellipsis within the second conjunct. On the other hand, counterexpectational but is not restricted in this way, and offers the possibility of coordination of both clausal and subclausal constituents. From this difference, it is possible to derive a number of syntactic asymmetries between corrective and counterexpectational but.}, Author = {Vicente, Luis}, Date-Added = {2010-07-02 10:42:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-07-02 10:43:38 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {381--415}, Title = {On the syntax of adversative coordination}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Takahashi:2010, Abstract = {I propose that a moved clausal complement must involve a DP structure headed by a covert determiner. This proposal explains the fact that the base-generated position of a moved clausal complement must show properties of DPs even though the moved constituent appears to be a CP. I argue that the necessity of the DP structure comes from properties of an independently motivated mechanism for interpreting structures involving a movement dependency under the copy theory of movement. Together with a particular theory of counter-cyclic merger, the proposed analysis also captures (anti-)reconstruction effects exhibited by movement of a clausal complement.}, Author = {Takahashi, Shoichi}, Date-Added = {2010-07-02 10:41:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-07-02 10:42:10 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {343--380}, Title = {The hidden side of clausal complements}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Otsuka:2010, Abstract = {This paper proposes that syntactic ergativity should be understood as a construction-based phenomenon rather than a parametric property that defines a subset of morphologically ergative languages. It argues that syntactic ergativity arises when the relevant operation is sensitive to (abstract) Case. Since not all syntactic operations are sensitive to Case, it is expected that some morphologically ergative languages do not show syntactic ergativity, or even demonstrate syntactic split ergativity. As an illustration, two types of coordination reduction in Tongan (Polynesian) are examined: pea-coordination showing an ergative/absolutive pattern and mo-coordination showing a nominative/accusative pattern. It is argued that DP ellipsis in pea-coordination is a Case-sensitive operation, i.e., PF deletion based on featural identity, whereas mo-coordination involves a null pronoun and LF copying, which is based on positional identity, regardless of Case.}, Author = {Otsuka, Yuko}, Date-Added = {2010-07-02 10:38:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-07-02 10:40:00 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {315--342}, Title = {{DP} ellipsis in {T}ongan: is syntactic ergativity real?}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hofmeister:2010, Abstract = {To account for the linear freedom of either in disjunction constructions, I expand upon the focus-based account of den Dikken (2006). Word order constraints, in contrast to movement rules or base-generation constraints, provide the mechanism for explaining the distributional data. I argue that all positional variability exhibited by either ultimately derives from a licensing construction that enables either to be shuffled about disjunct-internally, yet simultaneously prevents either from entering into linear precedence relations with disjunct-external constituents. Restrictions on the surface realization of either result from a linear precedence rule ordering either before the contrastive focus, language particular constraints on word order, and general constraints on coordinate ellipsis. Overall, this analysis presents an account of either . . . or constructions that introduces only a single linear precedence rule and a licensing construction for combining either with disjunctions to account for the data, relying on independently-motivated constraints to carry the rest of the analytical burden.}, Author = {Hofmeister, Philip}, Date-Added = {2010-07-02 10:36:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-07-02 10:37:26 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {275--314}, Title = {A linearization accout of \emph{either}...\emph{or} constructions}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Camacho:2010, Abstract = {This paper discusses switch-reference (SR) systems in Pano and Muskogean languages, and proposes that grammatical CASE plays an essential role in licensing same-subject SR constructions in these languages. Specifically, CASE activates an agreement relationship between two clauses, allowing for transmission of information about participant coreference. different-subject SR, on the other hand, does not involve CASE concord, but signals the activation of a discourse participant that was either inactive in the background or not present.}, Author = {Camacho, Jos{\'e}}, Date-Added = {2010-07-02 10:34:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-07-02 10:35:48 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {239--274}, Title = {On case concord: the syntax of switch-reference clauses}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Heycock:2010, Abstract = {In this article we investigate the status of two different types of movement in subordinate clauses in Faroese: the movement of the finite verb to a position below the subject but above negation and medial adverbs (V-to- I), and the movement of some XP and the finite verb to positions above the subject (V2). The exact status of these phenomena in contemporary Faroese, a language that has been argued to be undergoing syntactic change, is a matter of dispute; we attempt to clarify this using the methodology of Magnitude Estimation (ME). We extend what is known by presenting the results of a systematic comparison of judgment data from Icelandic (where the finite verb obligatorily moves to a high position within the clause, and embedded V2 has been claimed to be possible quite generally), Danish (where the finite verb obligatorily remains in a low position, and embedded V2 has been claimed to be restricted), and Faroese (where the status of verb movement is precisely at issue, and the availability of embedded V2 has been little explored).}, Author = {Heycock, Caroline and Sorace, Antonella and Zakaris, Svabo Hansen}, Date-Added = {2010-06-30 11:30:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-30 11:31:35 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {61--97}, Title = {V-to-{I} in subordinate clauses: an investigation of {F}aroese in relation to {I}celandic and {D}anish}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Hoekstra:2010, Abstract = {In this paper I will take the special properties of the Modern West Frisian impersonal pronoun men `one' (obligatory inclusiveness, 1st person singular reading, strength) and the typology of impersonal pronouns in Frisian as the starting point for a discussion of the referential status of impersonal pronouns in general. I will claim that impersonal pronouns are the pronominal counterpart of generic DPs and, like these, definite, but non-specific. Further, it will be argued that the most important typological distinction with impersonal pronouns, viz. that between inclusive and exclusive, is a consequence of their non-specificity. With respect to Modern West Frisian men I will contend that this element, in addition to being a genuine (weak) impersonal pronoun, can be a (strong) quasi-personal pronoun. I will provide some further evidence for this subclass of impersonal pronouns and show how its existence is predicted by my general theory of impersonal pronouns.}, Author = {Hoekstra, Jarich}, Date-Added = {2010-06-30 11:28:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-30 11:29:32 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {31--59}, Title = {On the impersonal pronoun \emph{men} in {M}odern {W}est {F}risian}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Kleemann-Kramer:2010, Abstract = {It is well known that the distribution of focus particles such as only, also and even varies across languages. Focus particle placement is less restricted, for example, in English, which features adverbial as well as adnominal focus particles. That is opposed to German which only has adverbial focus particles. According to B{\"u}ring and Hartmann's (Nat Lang Linguist Theory 19:229--281, 2001) Particle Theory, German focus particles only adjoin to nodes which are non-arguments. The correctness of the Particle Theory is not uncontroversial. It has been argued that the Particle Theory makes the wrong predictions about focus particle placement within NPs. The aim of this paper is to show that apparent counterexamples, in fact, provide new evidence in favor of B{\"u}ring and Hartmann's Particle Theory. It argues that NP-internal focus particles adjoin to extra non-nominal functional projections which do count as focus particle adjunction sites according to the Particle Theory. Evidence comes from German as well as Dutch NP-internal focus particles.}, Author = {Kleemann-Kr{\"a}mer, Anja}, Date-Added = {2010-06-30 11:26:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-30 11:27:07 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--29}, Title = {On apparent {NP}-internal focus particles in {G}erman}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Yoshida:2010, Author = {Yoshida, Masaya}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 13:05:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-31 15:30:47 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {348--356}, Title = {``{A}ntecedent-Contained'' Sluicing}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Wiland:2010, Author = {Wiland, Bartosz}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 13:04:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 13:05:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {335--347}, Title = {Overt Evidence from Left-Branch Extraction in {P}olish for Punctuated Paths}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Baltin:2010, Author = {Baltin, Mark}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 13:02:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 13:03:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {331--335}, Title = {The Nonreality of Doubly Filled Comps}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Lin:2010, Abstract = {Sybesma (2007) argues for the existence of a syntactic T node in Chinese on the basis of general theoretical considerations and parallel empirical data from Dutch and Chinese. This reply shows that a tenseless analysis of Chinese is an equally viable alternative or even a better one, given some empirical problems that the tensed analysis has to face. The tenseless analysis is backed up not only by its ability to explain the data in a more elegant way but also by syntactic facts that seem to be unrelated coincidences under a tensed analysis but are natural consequences under a tenseless alternative.}, Author = {Lin, Jo-Wang}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 13:00:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 13:02:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {305--329}, Title = {A Tenseless Analysis of {M}andarin {C}hinese Revisited: A Response to {S}ybsema 2007}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Bruening:2010, Abstract = {Recent work by Bresnan and colleagues (Bresnan 2007, Bresnan et al. 2007, Bresnan and Nikitina 2007) has argued that double object and prepositional dative constructions are essentially identical, the choice between them being conditioned by various factors. I argue against this conclusion, showing that the grammar clearly distinguishes double object from prepositional dative constructions. Under certain circumstances, the first object of a double object construction can shift to the right, with the preposition to appearing, but the grammar still distinguishes this from a prepositional dative construction that looks identi- cal on the surface. The phenomena that I investigate are scope interactions with quantifiers and locative inversion. In addition, the rightward reordering operations investigated here indicate that constraints on variable binding, including weak crossover, must be formulated in terms of linear order rather than hierarchy.}, Author = {Bruening, Benjamin}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 12:59:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 13:00:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {281--305}, Title = {Double Object Constructions Disguised as Prepositional Datives}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Lahrouchi:2010, Abstract = {This article examines the internal structure of triconsonantal roots in Tashlhiyt Berber. It is proposed that these roots have a binary-branching head-complement structure, built upon the sonorant and the segment immediately to its left. Evidence for this structure is provided by the imperfective formation. It is argued that only roots that display such a structure undergo gemination in the imperfective. This permits an account for a number of forms that are traditionally ascribed to lexical idiosyncrasy, including verbs that are made up entirely of obstruents and those whose only sonorant is in initial position.}, Author = {Lahrouchi, Mohamed}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 12:57:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 12:58:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {255--285}, Title = {On the Internal Structure of {T}ashlhiyt {B}erber Triconsonantal Roots}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Ko:2010, Abstract = {This article investigates the role of presuppositionality (defined as the presupposition of existence) in the second language (L2) acquisition of English articles. Building upon the proposal in Wexler 2003 that young English-acquiring children overuse the with presuppositional indefinites, this article proposes that presuppositionality also influ- ences article (mis)use in adult L2 acquisition. This proposal is supported by experimental results from the L2 English of adult speakers of Korean, a language with no articles. The experimental findings indicate that presuppositional indefinite contexts trigger overuse of the with indefinites in adult L2 acquisition, as in child L1 acquisition (cf. Wexler 2003). The effects of presuppositionality are teased apart from the effects of other semantic factors previously examined in acquisition, such as scope (Schaeffer and Matthewson 2005) and specificity (Ionin, Ko, and Wexler 2004). The results provide evidence that over- use of the in L2 acquisition is a semantic rather than pragmatic phenomenon. Implications of these findings for overuse of the in L1 acquisition are discussed. This article also has implications for the study of access to Universal Grammar in L2 acquisition, as well as for the number and type of semantic universals underlying article choice crosslinguistically.}, Author = {Ko, Heejeong and Ionin, Tania and Wexler, Ken}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 12:55:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 12:57:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {213--254}, Title = {The Role of Presuppositionality in the Second Language Acquisition of {E}nglish Articles}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Haegeman:2010, Abstract = {This article examines the formalization of negative concord in terms of the Minimalist Program, focusing entirely on negative concord in West Flemish. It is shown that a recent analysis of negative concord that advocates Multiple Agree is empirically inadequate. Instead of Multiple Agree, a particular implementation of the simpler and less powerful binary Agree proves superior in deriving the data in question.}, Author = {Haegeman, Liliane and Lohndal, Terje}, Date-Added = {2010-06-28 12:53:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 12:55:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {181--211}, Title = {Negative Concord and (Multiple) {A}gree: A Case Study of {W}est {F}lemish}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @incollection{Krifka:2006, Author = {Krifka, Manfred}, Booktitle = {The Architecture of Focus}, Date-Added = {2010-06-21 21:33:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-21 21:35:17 -0400}, Editor = {Moln{\'a}r, V. and Winkler, Susanne}, Pages = {105--135}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Series = {Studies in Generative Grammar}, Title = {Association with Focus Phrases}, Volume = {82}, Year = {2006}} @incollection{Cheng:2007, Author = {Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen}, Booktitle = {The Copy Theory of Movement}, Date-Added = {2010-06-20 15:56:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-20 15:59:04 -0400}, Editor = {Corver, Norbert and Nunes, Jairo}, Pages = {151--174}, Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company}, Title = {Verb copying in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Year = {2007}} @phdthesis{Kobele:2006, Address = {Los Angeles, CA}, Author = {Kobele, Gregory Michael}, Date-Added = {2010-06-20 12:41:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-20 12:43:04 -0400}, School = {University of California, Los Angeles}, Title = {Generating Copies: An investigation into structural identity in language and grammar}, Year = {2006}} @incollection{Hohle:2000, Author = {H{\"o}hle, Tilman N.}, Booktitle = {Wh-Scope Marking}, Date-Added = {2010-06-19 11:14:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-19 11:16:44 -0400}, Editor = {Lutz, Uli and M{\"u}ller, Gereon and Stechow, Arnim von}, Pages = {249--270}, Publisher = {John Benjamins}, Title = {The w...w construction: Appositive or Scope Indicating?}, Year = {2000}} @article{Lahiri:2002a, Author = {Lahiri, Utpal}, Date-Added = {2010-06-18 16:48:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-18 16:49:26 -0400}, Journal = {Lingua}, Number = {7}, Pages = {501--540}, Title = {On the proper treatment of ``expletive \emph{wh}'' in {H}indi}, Volume = {112}, Year = {2002}} @incollection{Fanselow:2000, Author = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Mahajan, Anoop}, Booktitle = {Wh-Scope Marking}, Date-Added = {2010-06-18 10:51:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-18 10:53:51 -0400}, Editor = {Lutz, Uli and M{\"u}ller, Gereon and Stechow, Arnim von}, Pages = {195--230}, Publisher = {John Benjamins}, Title = {Towards a Minimalist Theory of wh-expletives, wh-copying, and successive cyclicity}, Year = {2000}} @incollection{Villiers:1990, Author = {de Villiers, Jill and Roeper, Tom and Vainikka, Anne}, Booktitle = {Language Processing and Language Acquisition}, Date-Added = {2010-06-17 17:34:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-17 17:36:17 -0400}, Editor = {Frazier, Lyn and de Villiers, Jill}, Pages = {257--297}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Title = {The Acquisition of Long-Distance Rules}, Year = {1990}} @incollection{Fanselow:2001a, Address = {Berlin}, Author = {Fanselow, Gisbert and {\'C}avar, Damir}, Booktitle = {Competition in Syntax}, Date-Added = {2010-06-16 17:42:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-16 17:47:40 -0400}, Editor = {M{\"u}ller, Gereon and Sternefeld, Wolfgang}, Pages = {107--150}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Title = {Remarks on the economy of pronunciation}, Year = {2001}} @incollection{Pesetsky:1997, Address = {Malden, Massachusetts}, Author = {Pesetsky, David}, Booktitle = {Optimality Theory: An Overview}, Date-Added = {2010-05-25 10:53:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-25 10:54:25 -0400}, Editor = {Archangeli, Diana and Langendoen, D. Terence}, Pages = {134--170}, Publisher = {Blackwell Publishers}, Title = {Optimality {T}heory and Syntax: Movement and pronunciation}, Year = {1997}} @article{Gartner:1998, Author = {G{\"a}rtner, Hans-Martin}, Date-Added = {2010-05-25 10:50:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-25 10:51:48 -0400}, Journal = {{GLOT} International}, Number = {3}, Pages = {16--20}, Title = {Review of ``The copy theory of movement and linearization of chains in the {M}inimalist {P}rogram''}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1998}} @book{Boskovic:2001a, Address = {Amsterdam}, Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko}, Date-Added = {2010-05-25 10:46:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-25 10:48:12 -0400}, Publisher = {Elsevier Science}, Title = {On the nature of the Syntax-Phonology Interface: Cliticization and related phenomena}, Year = {2001}} @incollection{Fanselow:1995, Address = {University of T{\"u}bingen}, Author = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Mahajan, Anoop}, Booktitle = {Papers on \emph{Wh}-Scope Marking}, Date-Added = {2010-05-25 10:41:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-25 10:44:32 -0400}, Editor = {Lutz, Uli and M{\"u}ller, Gereon}, Pages = {131--161}, Publisher = {Sprachtheoretische Grundlagen f{\"u}r die Computer Linguistik}, Title = {Partial movement and successive cyclicity}, Year = {1995}} @article{Moltmann:1992a, Author = {Moltmann, Friederike}, Date-Added = {2010-05-23 12:16:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-23 12:17:25 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Pages = {411--462}, Title = {Reciprocals and Same/Different: Towards a Semantic Analysis}, Volume = {15}, Year = {1992}} @article{Beck:2000c, Author = {Beck, Sigrid}, Date-Added = {2010-05-23 12:15:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-23 12:15:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Number = {1}, Pages = {101--139}, Title = {The Semantics of \emph{Different}: Comparison Operator and Relational Adjective}, Volume = {23}, Year = {2000}} @article{Carlson:1987, Author = {Carlson, Greg}, Date-Added = {2010-05-23 12:10:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-23 12:13:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Number = {4}, Pages = {531--566}, Title = {Same and Different: Some Consequences for Syntax and Semantics}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1987}} @article{Phillips:2010, Abstract = {The 1990s witnessed a major expansion in research on children's morphosyntactic development, due largely to the availability of computer-searchable corpora of spontaneous speech in the CHILDES database. This led to a rapid emergence of parallel findings in different languages, with much attention devoted to the widely attested difficulties in inflectional morphology in the speech of two- year-olds. First written in 1995, and framed within the terms of contemporary syntactic theories, this article argues that cross-linguistic differences in the distribution of children's morphosyntactic errors provide important clues to the source of the errors, in particular whether they are morphological or syntactic in origin. The article takes as its starting point some striking previous findings that children's verb inflection errors are systematically correlated, on a sentence-by-sentence basis, with errors in the use of overt subjects, and with the use of syntactically complex constructions such as wh-questions. The article shows that these correlations are found in some languages but not in others, and argues that these differences are predictable, based on the verb movement and case licensing properties of individual languages. The article argues that children's errors reflect a combination of grammatical and speech production deficits.}, Author = {Phillips, Colin}, Date-Added = {2010-05-20 09:38:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-20 09:40:01 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {70--120}, Title = {Syntax at Age Two: Cross-Linguistic Differences}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Lillo-Martin:2010, Author = {Lillo-Martin, Diane and Snyder, William}, Date-Added = {2010-05-20 09:36:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-20 09:37:47 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {66--69}, Title = {Commentary on ``Syntax at Age Two''}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Verbuk:2010, Abstract = {We argue that the debate over the delay of Principle B effects needs to include an additional class of contexts: Evans-style or Exceptional Coreference contexts (ECCs) (e.g., ``It's not true that no one voted for John. John1 voted for him1''). Our experiment compares acquisition of regular Principle B contexts (B-contexts) and ECCs by English-speaking children. Thornton and Wexler (1999) predict that there will be no age at which the acceptance of the disjoint reference reading is significantly higher in ECCs than in B-contexts, while Reinhart (in press), in contrast, predicts gradual trends towards more adult-like performance in each condition; we tested each of these predictions. Our experimental results are incompatible with Thornton and Wexler (1999) and are compatible with Reinhart (in press). Our results are also compatible with our own account on which ECCs pose additional pragmatic challenges compared to B-contexts.}, Author = {Verbuk, Anna and Roeper, Thomas}, Date-Added = {2010-05-20 09:34:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-20 09:35:37 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {51--65}, Title = {How Pragmatics and Syntax Make Principle {B} Acquirable}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Viau:2010, Abstract = {Though preschoolers in certain experimental contexts strongly prefer to interpret ambiguous sentences containing quantified NPs and negation on the basis of surface syntax (e.g., Musolino's 1998 ``observation of isomorphism''), contextual manipulations can lead to more adult-like behavior. But is isomorphism a purely pragmatic phenomenon, as recently proposed? In Experiment 1, we begin by isolating the contextual factor responsible for children's improvement in Musolino & Lidz (2006). We then demonstrate in Experiment 2 that this factor can be used to prime inverse scope interpretations. To remove pragmatics from the equation to the extent possible, we show in Experiment 3 that the same effect can be achieved via semantic priming. Our results represent the first clear evidence for priming of the abstract logico-syntactic structures underlying these interpretations and, thus, highlight the importance of language processing alongside pragmatic reasoning during children's linguistic development.}, Author = {Viau, Joshua and Lidz, Jeffrey and Musolino, Julien}, Date-Added = {2010-05-20 09:32:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-20 09:33:34 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {26--50}, Title = {Priming of Abstract Logical Representations in 4-year-olds}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @article{Castilla:2010, Abstract = {This study examined the existence of an object omission stage and the interaction between object omissions and substitution errors in the early stages of the development of Spanish syntax. One hundred and three Spanish-speaking children from Colombia completed an elicitation task evaluating the production of direct object pronouns. Results indicated that 3-year-olds were producing 35% of transitive structures with object omission, and 4- and 5-year-olds were producing around 15% of transitive structures with object omission. The production of clitic pronouns increased with age, and the change happened primarily between the ages of three and four. The results failed to find a relation between omissions and substitutions. These results suggest that there is an early object optionality stage for young Spanish-speaking children and are compatible with approaches that predict some degree of object optionality for all languages.}, Author = {Castilla, Anny P. and P{\'e}rez-Leroux, Ana T.}, Date-Added = {2010-05-20 09:28:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-20 09:30:44 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {2--25}, Title = {Omissions and Substitutions in {S}panish Object Clitics: Developmental Optionality as a Property of the Representational System}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2010}} @book{Emonds:2000, Address = {Berlin and New York}, Author = {Emonds, Joseph E.}, Date-Added = {2010-05-19 12:28:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-19 12:30:37 -0400}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Series = {Studies in Generative Grammar}, Title = {Lexicon and Grammar: The {E}nglish {S}yntacticon}, Year = {2000}} @incollection{Kandybowicz:2006, Author = {Kandybowicz, Jason}, Booktitle = {The Copy Theory of Movement on the {PF} Side}, Date-Added = {2010-04-27 12:22:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-27 12:23:32 -0400}, Editor = {Nunes, Jairo and Corver, Norbert}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {On Fusion and Multiple Copy Spell-Out: The Case of Verb Repetition}, Year = {2006}} @phdthesis{Pranka:1983, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Pranka, Paula}, Date-Added = {2010-04-25 11:07:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-25 11:08:08 -0400}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {Syntax and Word Formation}, Year = {1983}} @article{McCloskey:1986a, Author = {McCloskey, James}, Date-Added = {2010-04-21 11:27:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-21 11:55:12 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {245--281}, Title = {Inflection and conjunction in {M}odern {I}rish}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1986}} @article{Borer:1984, Author = {Borer, Hagit}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 16:53:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 16:54:44 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {219--260}, Title = {Restrictive relatives in modern {H}ebrew}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1984}} @article{Pullum:1983b, Author = {Pullum, Geoffrey K.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 16:32:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 16:33:23 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {201--206}, Title = {Watch out for the current}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1983}} @article{Anderson:1984, Author = {Anderson, Stephen}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 16:30:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 16:52:50 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {157--218}, Title = {On representations in morphology case, agreement and inversion in {G}eorgian}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1984}} @article{Perlmutter:1983a, Author = {Perlmutter, David M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 16:28:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 09:12:22 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {141--200}, Title = {Personal vs. impersonal constructions}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1983}} @article{Haider:1986, Author = {Haider, Hubert}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 16:06:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 16:12:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {113--126}, Title = {Affect $\alpha$: A reply to {L}asnik and {S}aito, ``On the Nature of Proper Government''}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Browne:1986, Author = {Browne, Allen C.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 14:54:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 14:55:33 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {751--754}, Title = {Univocal \emph{or} -Again}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Grimshaw:1986a, Author = {Grimshaw, Jane}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 14:53:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 14:53:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {745--749}, Title = {A morphosyntactic explanation for the {M}irror {P}rinciple}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Schein:1986, Author = {Schein, Barry and Steriade, Donca}, Date-Added = {2010-04-20 14:51:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 14:51:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {691--744}, Title = {On Geminates}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Van-Valin:1986, Author = {Van Valin, Robert D.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 16:28:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 16:30:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {581--586}, Title = {An empty category as the subject of a tense {S} in {E}nglish}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Pulleyblank:1986, Author = {Pulleyblank, Douglas}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 16:27:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 16:28:07 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {573--580}, Title = {Rule application on a noncyclic stratum}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Malone:1986, Author = {Malone, Joseph L.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 16:25:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 16:27:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {568--573}, Title = {Servo-features, [+distributed], and {O}ld {I}rish {S}onorant {L}enition}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Barrett-Keach:1986, Author = {Barrett-Keach, Camillia N.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 16:23:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 16:24:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {559--564}, Title = {Word-internal evidence from {S}wahili for aux/infl}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Rizzi:1986b, Author = {Rizzi, Luigi}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 15:19:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 15:24:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {501--557}, Title = {Null {O}jects in {I}talian and the Theory of \emph{pro}}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Hayes:1986, Author = {Hayes, Bruce}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 15:14:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 15:19:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {467--499}, Title = {Assimilation as spreading in {T}oba {B}atak}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Borer:1986, Author = {Borer, Hagit}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:41:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-06-28 08:42:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {375--416}, Title = {{I}-subjects}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Kiragawa:1986, Author = {Kitagawa, Yoshihisa}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:40:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:40:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {177--184}, Title = {More on bracketing paradoxes}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Comorovski:1986, Author = {Comorovski, Ileana}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:38:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:39:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {171--177}, Title = {Multiple \emph{Wh} Movement in {R}omanian}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Trommelen:1986, Author = {Trommelen, Mieke and Zonneveld, Wim}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:32:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:38:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {147--169}, Title = {Dutch Morphology: Evidence for the {R}ight-hand {H}ead {R}ule}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Steriade:1986, Author = {Steriade, Donca}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:23:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:24:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {129--146}, Title = {Yokuts and the Vowel Plane}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Lasnik:1986, Author = {Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:20:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:22:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {126--129}, Title = {On Accessibility}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Lightfoot:1986, Author = {Lightfoot, David W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:19:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:20:07 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {111--113}, Title = {A Brief Response}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Postal:1986a, Author = {Postal, Paul M. and Pullum, Geoffrey K.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:18:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:19:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {104--110}, Title = {Misgovernment}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Bouchard:1986, Author = {Bouchard, Denis}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:17:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:18:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {95--104}, Title = {Empty Categories and the Contraction Debate}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Liejiong:1986, Author = {Liejiong, Xu}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:17:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:17:48 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {75--93}, Title = {Free Empty Category}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Ito:1986, Author = {It{\^{o}}, Junko and Mester, Ralf-Armin}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:15:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 16:09:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {49--73}, Title = {The phonology of voicing in {J}apanese}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Gunnarson:1986, Author = {Gunnarson, Kjell-{\AA}ke}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:11:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-20 16:18:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {13--47}, Title = {Predicative Structures and Projections of Lexical Dependencies}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Guerssel:1986, Author = {Guerssel, Mohamed}, Date-Added = {2010-04-16 14:08:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-16 14:10:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--12}, Title = {Glides in {B}erber and Syllabicity}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Stephens:1979, Author = {Stephens, Lawrence}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:24:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:25:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {365--369}, Title = {Once Again {L}achmann's {L}aw}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Joseph:1979, Author = {Joseph, Brian}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:24:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:25:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {363--365}, Title = {Lachmann's {L}aw once again}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Klausenburger:1979, Author = {Klausenburger, Jurgen}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:23:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:24:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {362--363}, Title = {Is {L}achmann's {L}aw a rule?}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Pullum:1979a, Author = {Pullum, Geoffrey K.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:22:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:23:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {356--362}, Title = {The nonexistence of the {T}race-{B}inding {A}lgorithm}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Munro:1979, Author = {Munro, Allen}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:22:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:22:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {353--356}, Title = {Indirect speech acts are not strictly conventional}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Goldsmith:1979, Author = {Goldsmith, John}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:20:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:21:48 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {347--352}, Title = {On the thematic nature of \emph{See}}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Cushing:1979, Author = {Cushing, Steven}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:18:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:20:30 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {327--345}, Title = {Lexical functions and lexical decomposition: an algebraic approach to lexical meaning}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Feinstein:1979, Author = {Feinstein, Mark H.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:15:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:18:04 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {245--278}, Title = {Prenasalization and syllable structure}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Emonds:1979, Author = {Emonds, Joseph}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 16:13:09 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:14:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {211--243}, Title = {Appositive relatives have no properties}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Clements:1979, Author = {Clements, George N. and Ford, Kevin C.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:56:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 16:10:33 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {179--210}, Title = {Kikuyu tone shift and it's synchronic consequences}, Volume = {10}, Year = {1979}} @article{Bresnan:1978, Author = {Bresnan, Joan and Grimshaw, Jane}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:55:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:56:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {331--391}, Title = {The syntax of free relatives in {E}nglish}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Cushing:1978a, Author = {Cushing, Steven}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:51:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:52:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {327--330}, Title = {A note on node self-dominance}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Pullum:1978, Author = {Pullum, Geoffrey K. and Zwicky, Arnold M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:49:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:50:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {326--327}, Title = {Self-domination}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Johnson:1978, Author = {Johnson, David E.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:48:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:49:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {325}, Title = {A note on self-dominance}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Schreiber:1978, Author = {Schreiber, Peter A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:47:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:48:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {318--325}, Title = {\emph{There}-Insertion and number agreement}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Nanni:1978, Author = {Nanni, Debbie L.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:47:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:47:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {310--318}, Title = {Three remarks on {P}ied {P}iping}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Manaster-Ramer:1978a, Author = {Manaster-Ramer, Alexis}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:46:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:47:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {308--310}, Title = {Comparatives and factives}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Kupin:1978, Author = {Kupin, Joseph J.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:45:21 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:46:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {303--308}, Title = {A motivated alternative to phrase markers}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Aronoff:1978, Author = {Aronoff, Mark}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:43:21 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:44:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {299--303}, Title = {An {E}nglish spelling convention}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Ard:1978, Author = {Ard, Josh}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:40:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:40:47 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {297--299}, Title = {Word order templates in ergative languages}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Andor:1978, Author = {Andor, J{\'o}zsef}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:35:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:39:08 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {294--297}, Title = {Some notes on stativeness}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Amastae:1978, Author = {Amastae, Jon}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:30:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:33:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {291--294}, Title = {A Note on {N}atural {G}enerative {P}honology and {P}aradigm {L}eveling}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Castel:1978, Author = {du Castel, Bertrand}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:28:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:30:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {275--289}, Title = {Form and interpretation of relative clauses in {E}nglish}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Chomsky:1978, Author = {Chomsky, Noam and Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:26:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:27:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {268--274}, Title = {A remark on contraction}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Andrews:1978, Author = {Andrews, Avery}, Date-Added = {2010-04-13 15:00:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 15:28:05 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {261--268}, Title = {Remarks on \emph{To} Adjunction}, Volume = {9}, Year = {1978}} @article{Wagner:2010, Abstract = {Generalizations about relative prosodic boundary strength are recursive. Initial evidence comes from the fragment of English consisting only of proper names and ``and'' and ``or.'' A systematic relation between the semantics, the syntactic combinatorics, and the prosodic phrasing of coordinate structures can be captured by recursively building up their prosody, in tandem with assembling their compositional meaning. Alternative edge-based approaches to prosodic phrasing fail to capture the recursive nature of the generalization, a result independent of whether or not prosodic representation itself is assumed to be recursive. The pattern generalizes beyond the grammar of coordination, despite two types of apparent counterexamples: Structures that are prosodically flat but syntactically articulated, and structures with an apparent outright mismatch between prosody and syntax. Closer inspection suggests that the syntax might actually be quite in tune with prosody. In both cases, natural language employs strategies to construe complex meaning with list-like structures rather than nested ones. The privileged status of lists may be due to processing factors.}, Author = {Wagner, Michael}, Date-Added = {2010-04-12 10:15:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-12 10:16:27 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {183--237}, Title = {Prosody and recursion in coordinate structures and beyond}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Levinson:2010, Abstract = {This paper addresses the compositionality puzzle presented by a class of `pseudo-resultative' predicates, such as tight in the sentence She braided her hair tight. The analysis proposed reveals that the modification involved also provides insight into the nature of the lexical roots of verbs and their role in compositional semantics. Pseudo-resultative predicates superficially resemble resultative secondary predicates and resultative adverbs. However, it is shown that they do not modify any `word' in the syntax. Rather, these predicates modify the root of the verb in a configuration which is licensed by the semantic type of the root and the structure of root creation verbs. The modification of such roots provides evidence that they are syntactically active, as proposed in the framework of Distributed Morphology (Halle and Marantz 1993; Marantz 1997; Arad 2003). It is shown that the roots are syntactically well-behaved and can be modified just like other `larger' constituents. Syntactic parallels between the root creation verbs which license pseudo-resultative predicates and other structures further provide evidence for a syntactic decomposition of these verbs whereby the object is related to the root in a prepositional structure in a manner reminiscent of proposals for other classes of verbs in Hale and Keyser (1993, 2002).}, Author = {Levinson, Lisa}, Date-Added = {2010-04-12 10:12:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-12 10:14:18 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {135--182}, Title = {Arguments for pseudo-resultative predicates}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Legate:2010, Abstract = {This article examines a construction in English which has hitherto escaped attention in the linguistic literature, whereby a declarative embedded clause is introduced by \emph{how} rather than \emph{that}. We investigate the properties of this construction, revealing that it consists of a definite DP, rather than a simple embedded CP.}, Author = {Legate, Julie Anne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-12 10:10:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-12 10:12:03 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {121--134}, Title = {On how \emph{how} is used instead of \emph{that}}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Deal:2010, Abstract = {Ergative case, the special case of transitive subjects, raises questions not only for the theory of case but also for theories of subjecthood and transitivity. This paper analyzes the case system of Nez Perce, a ``three-way ergative'' language, with an eye towards a formalization of the category of transitive subject. I show that it is object agreement that is determinative of transitivity, and hence of ergative case, in Nez Perce. I further show that the transitivity condition on ergative case must be coupled with a criterion of subjecthood that makes reference to participation in subject agreement, not just to origin in a high argument-structural position. These two results suggest a formalization of the transitive subject as that argument uniquely accessing both high and low agreement information, the former through its (agreement-derived) connection with T and the latter through its origin in the specifier of a head associated with object agreement (v). In view of these findings, I argue that ergative case morphology should be analyzed not as the expression of a syntactic primitive but as the morphological spell-out of subject agreement and object agreement on a nominal.}, Author = {Deal, Amy Rose}, Date-Added = {2010-04-12 10:08:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-12 10:10:04 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {73--120}, Title = {Ergative Case and the transitive subject: a view from {N}ez {P}erce}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{DAlessandro:2010, Abstract = {In this paper, we present an analysis of the ``person-driven'' auxiliary-selection system of one variety of the Upper Southern Italo-Romance dialect Abruzzese, along with an account of the pattern of past participle agreement in this variety, which differs somewhat from what is found in more familiar Romance languages. Our account relies on the technical mechanisms of agreement as outlined in Chomsky (1995, 2001), in particular a variant of Chomsky's (2008) proposal regarding feature inheritance by non-phase heads of features belonging to phase heads, combined with Gallego's (2006) notion of phase-sliding. We also utilise some aspects of Mueller's (2004) analysis of ergativity, and propose an account of a typological generalisation regarding the absence of person-driven auxiliary selection first put forward in Kayne (2000:127) in the Germanic languages. To the extent that the analyses proposed successfully apply the mechanisms put forward in the recent versions of the minimalist program, the postulation of these mechanisms is supported by our analysis with evidence from a new empirical domain. We also offer some general speculations regarding auxiliary selection in general.}, Author = {D'Alessandro, Roberta and Roberts, Ian}, Date-Added = {2010-04-12 10:05:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-12 10:07:37 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {41--72}, Title = {Past participle agreement in {A}bruzzese: Split Auxiliary Selection and the null-subject parameter}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Boneh:2010, Abstract = {The paper argues that clausal possession is to be decomposed into three distinct, independently attested, syntactic configurations, each associated with its own meaning. These include Location, represented as an ordinary small clause, the Part- Whole relation, which always has a complement structure within DP as its source, and an applicative structure ApplP, the source of (in)alienable possession, where humans are treated as special. The analysis we propose focuses on Palestinian Arabic and extends to English clausal possession and its realizations across HAVE and BE. Pales- tinian Arabic overtly distinguishes a number of ingredients which in other languages enter into possession less transparently: It marks Location and Part-Whole relations by distinct prepositions, it features a full-agreement/no-agreement distinction associated with scope, and, lacking HAVE, it keeps separate P and BE, the ingredients often assumed to enter into its composition. The picture which emerges is partly familiar and partly new. We argue that the notion possession is never linguistically encoded as such, since none of the underlying representations proposed is associated exclusively with possession. We also argue that the subject in possessive clauses is a derived subject with both HAVE and BE. We attribute the differences between Palestinian Arabic and English to a difference in their agreement systems, which in conjunction with Economy, forces P to extract from its PP, and leads to the formation of HAVE. If we are correct, the cross-linguistic distribution of HAVE and BE may further reduce to parametric differences in agreement systems.}, Author = {Boneh, Nora and Sichel, Ivy}, Date-Added = {2010-04-12 10:02:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-12 10:05:30 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--40}, Title = {Deconstructing Possession}, Volume = {28}, Year = {2010}} @article{Kornfilt:1977a, Author = {Kornfilt, Jaklin}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:35:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:36:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {412--418}, Title = {Against the universal relevance of the {S}hadow {P}ronoun {H}ypothesis}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Cinque:1977, Author = {Cinque, Guglielmo}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:32:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:33:32 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {299--412}, Title = {The movement nature of left dislocation}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Rosenbaum:1977, Author = {Rosenbaum, Harvey}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:30:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:31:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {379--395}, Title = {Zapotec gapping as counterevidence to some universal proposals}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Dresher:1977, Author = {Dresher, Bezalel Elan}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:22:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:24:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {351--378}, Title = {Logical representations and linguistic theory}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Bellert:1977, Author = {Bellert, Irena}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:18:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:19:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {337--351}, Title = {On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Liberman:1977, Author = {Liberman, Mark and Prince, Alan}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:17:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:18:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {249--336}, Title = {On stress and linguistic rhythm}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Kiparsky:1977, Author = {Kiparsky, Paul}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:16:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:17:07 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {189--247}, Title = {The rythmic structure of {E}nglish verse}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Sommerstein:1977, Author = {Sommerstein, Alan H.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 13:00:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:01:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {184--188}, Title = {A nonargument for derivational history}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Rodman:1977, Author = {Rodman, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:58:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 13:00:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {181--184}, Title = {Concerning the {NP} constraint}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Morreall:1977, Author = {Morreall, John S.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:57:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:58:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {179--181}, Title = {Postal's ``reminds''}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Kirsner:1977, Author = {Kirsner, Robert S.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:56:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:57:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {173--179}, Title = {On the passive of sensory verb complement sentences}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Joseph:1977, Author = {Joseph, Brian}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:55:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:56:25 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {169--173}, Title = {On the cyclicity of extraposition-from-the claim}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Christie:1977, Author = {Christie, William M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:54:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:54:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {168--169}, Title = {Help}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Carden:1977a, Author = {Carden, Guy}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:53:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:54:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {163--168}, Title = {Performatives and quantifiers}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Stevens:1977, Author = {Stevens, Alan M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:52:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:53:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {155--162}, Title = {On local ordering in {S}undanese}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Postal:1977, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:45:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:52:14 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {141--154}, Title = {About ``Nonargument'' for raising}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Keenan:1977a, Author = {Keenan, Edward L. and Comrie, Bernard}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:40:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:45:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {63--99}, Title = {Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Dixon:1977a, Author = {Dixon, R. M. W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:38:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-14 11:48:59 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--34}, Title = {Some phonological rules in {Y}idin$^{y}$}, Volume = {8}, Year = {1977}} @article{Kohrt:1976, Author = {Kohrt, Manfred}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:33:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:34:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {729--732}, Title = {Extraposition in {G}erman: evidence for global rules}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Sobin:1976, Author = {Sobin, Nicholas}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:31:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:32:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {726--728}, Title = {Pragmatics of lurking}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Shanon:1976a, Author = {Shanon, Benny}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:30:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:31:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {724--726}, Title = {Overseas calls}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Roca:1976, Author = {Roca, Ignacio M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:30:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:30:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {718--724}, Title = {Ordering evidence from counterfeeding}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Maling:1976a, Author = {Maling, Joan M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:27:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:30:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {708--718}, Title = {Notes on quantifier-postposing}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Morin:1976, Author = {Morin, Yves Charles}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:21:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:27:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {706--707}, Title = {\emph{De Ces}: the lexicalization of a syntactic expression}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Reinhart:1976a, Author = {Reinhart, Tanya}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:19:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:20:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {697--705}, Title = {Polarity {R}eversal: logic or pragmatics?}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Gouet:1976, Author = {Gouet, Michel}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:14:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:19:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {693--697}, Title = {On a class of circumstantial deletion rules}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Cole:1976, Author = {Cole, Peter}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:11:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:13:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {686--693}, Title = {Relativization in {H}ebrew: a reply to {G}rosu}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Enee:1976, Author = {c, Roger}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:09:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-14 11:52:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {677--686}, Title = {A counterexample to the {Q} replacement and {COMP} substitution universals}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Cartmill:1976, Author = {Cartmill, Matt}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:06:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:08:47 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {675--677}, Title = {Welsh vowel mutation: surface phonology and underlying forms}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Vago:1976a, Author = {Vago, Robert M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:02:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:06:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {671--675}, Title = {More evidence for the feature [Grave]}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Sag:1976b, Author = {Sag, Ivan A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 12:01:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:02:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {664--671}, Title = {A note on verb phrase deletion}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Zaenen:1976, Author = {Zaenen, Annie}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:58:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 12:00:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {652--664}, Title = {The discovery of another island}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Iwakura:1976, Author = {Iwakura, Kunihiro}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:57:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:58:33 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {646--652}, Title = {Another constraint on sentential subjects}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Grosu:1976, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:54:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:56:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {642--645}, Title = {A note on subject raising to object and right node raising}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Abbott:1976a, Author = {Abbott, Barbara}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:51:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:53:07 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {639--642}, Title = {Right {N}ode {R}aising as a test for constituenthood}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Schindler:1976, Author = {Schindler, Jochem}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:49:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:50:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {622--637}, Title = {Diachronic and synchronic remarks on {B}artholomae's and {G}rassman's {L}aws}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Sag:1976a, Author = {Sag, Ivan A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:47:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:48:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {609--622}, Title = {Pseudosolutions to the pseudoparadox: {S}anskrit diaspirates revisited}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Quicoli:1976, Author = {Quicoli, A. Carlos}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:45:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:46:59 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {583--607}, Title = {Conditions on quantifier movement in {F}rench}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Lightfoot:1976, Author = {Lightfoot, David}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:43:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:43:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {559--582}, Title = {Trace {T}heory and twice moved {NP}s}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Kiparsky:1976, Author = {Kiparsky, Paul and O'Neil, Wayne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-09 11:41:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-09 11:42:04 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {527--557}, Title = {The phonology of {O}ld {E}nglish inflections}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Zonneveld:1976, Author = {Zonneveld, Wim}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:43:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:45:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {520--525}, Title = {Destressing in {H}alle's {E}nglish stress rules}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Shanon:1976, Author = {Shanon, Benny}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:42:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:43:28 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {518--519}, Title = {Semantic and syntactic features in the context of dreams}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Morreall:1976, Author = {Morreall, John}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:41:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:42:40 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {516--518}, Title = {The nonsynonymy of \emph{Kill} and \emph{Cause to Die}}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{LeSourd:1976, Author = {LeSourd, Philip}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:40:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:41:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {509--516}, Title = {\emph{Got} Insertion}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Joseph:1976, Author = {Joseph, Brian}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:34:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:40:28 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {503--508}, Title = {{ENVY}: A functional analysis}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Bresnan:1976, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:29:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:32:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {485--501}, Title = {Nonarguments for Raising}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Williams:1976, Author = {Williams, Edwin S.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:14:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:20:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {463--484}, Title = {Underlying Tone in {M}argi and {I}gbo}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Miller:1976, Author = {Miller, D. Gary}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:09:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:10:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {383--388}, Title = {On {M}irror-{I}mage {R}ules}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Karttunen:1976, Author = {Karttunen, Frances}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:04:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:09:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {380--383}, Title = {Nahuatl Nasals}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Vago:1976, Author = {Vago, Robert M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 14:01:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 14:04:05 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {243--263}, Title = {Theoretical implications of {H}ungarian {V}owel {H}armony}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Hagege:1976, Author = {Hagege, Claude}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:49:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 13:50:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {198--201}, Title = {Relative clause, center-embedding, and comprehensibility}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Epee:1976, Author = {Ep{\'e}e, Roger}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:46:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 14:54:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {193--198}, Title = {On some rules that are not {S}uccessive {C}yclic in {D}uala}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Fiengo:1976, Author = {Fiengo, Robert and Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:41:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 13:46:48 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {182--191}, Title = {Some issues in the {T}heory of {T}ransformations}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Postal:1976, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:39:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 13:41:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {151--191}, Title = {Avoiding reference to subject}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Jackendoff:1976, Author = {Jackendoff, Ray}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:38:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 13:39:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {89--150}, Title = {Toward an {E}xplanatory {S}emantic {R}epresentation}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Chung:1976, Author = {Chung, Sandra}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:31:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 13:38:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {41--87}, Title = {An {O}bject-{C}reating {R}ule in {B}ahasa {I}ndonesia}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Bresnan:1975a, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 13:25:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 13:30:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--40}, Title = {On the form and functioning of transformations}, Volume = {7}, Year = {1976}} @article{Wojcik:1975, Author = {Wojcik, Richard}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:42:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:43:01 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {605--613}, Title = {Wuzzywant}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Suner:1975, Author = {Su{\~{n}}er, Margarita}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:37:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:40:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {602--605}, Title = {Spanish adverbs: support for the {P}honological {C}ycle}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Kaye:1975, Author = {Kaye, Jonathan}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:35:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:37:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {599--602}, Title = {Klamath and {S}trict {C}yclicity}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Grosu:1975a, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:34:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:35:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {588--599}, Title = {The position of fronted \emph{WH} phrases}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Dowty:1975, Author = {Dowty, David R.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:28:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:34:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {579--588}, Title = {The stative in the progressive and other essence/accident contrasts}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Liddell:1975, Author = {Liddell, Scott K.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:27:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:28:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {568--578}, Title = {What about the fact that ``on certain ambiguities'' says what it says?}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Fauconnier:1975a, Author = {Fauconnier, Gilles}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:24:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:27:14 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {555--567}, Title = {Do quantifiers branch?}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Langendoen:1975, Author = {Langendoen, D. Terence}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:20:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:24:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {533-554}, Title = {Finite-{S}tate {P}arsing of {P}hrase-{S}tructure {L}anguages and the status of {R}eadjustmen {R}ules in grammar}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Fodor:1975a, Author = {Fodor, J. D. and Fodor, J. A. and Garrett, M. F.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:18:09 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:20:07 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {515--531}, Title = {The psychological unreality of semantic representations}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Yasui:1975, Author = {Yasui, Izumi}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:16:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:17:28 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {511--512}, Title = {Can the {I}ndefinite {A}rticle be derived from \emph{One}?}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Schmerling:1975, Author = {Schmerling, Susan F.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:15:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:16:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {501--511}, Title = {Imperative {S}ubject {D}eletion and some related matters}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Pullum:1975, Author = {Pullum, Geoffrey K.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:14:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:15:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {494--501}, Title = {On a nonargument for the cycle in {T}urkish}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Lehrer:1975, Author = {Lehrer, Adrienne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:11:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:14:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {489--494}, Title = {Complement-oriented adverbs}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Johnson:1975, Author = {Johnson, David E.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:10:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:11:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {481--489}, Title = {Why delete tense?}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Herslund:1975, Author = {Herslund, Michael}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:08:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:10:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {475--481}, Title = {A note on {O}ld {F}rench phonology: the source of [{\"u}]}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Grosu:1975, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:07:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:07:45 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {468--475}, Title = {A note on analogy}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Phelps:1975, Author = {Phelps, Elaine}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:04:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:06:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {447--464}, Title = {Sanskrit diaspirates}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Jackendoff:1975a, Author = {Jackendoff, Ray}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:02:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:04:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {437--447}, Title = {\emph{Tough} and the {T}race {T}heory of {M}ovement {R}ules}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Napoli:1975, Author = {Napoli, Donna Jo}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 12:00:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:01:42 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {413--435}, Title = {A global agreement phenomenon}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Keyser:1975, Author = {Keyser, Samuel Jay}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:57:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 12:00:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {377--411}, Title = {Metathesis and {O}ld {E}nglish phonology}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Silva:1975, Author = {Silva, Clare M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:54:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:57:11 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {346--350}, Title = {Adverbial \emph{-ING}}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Roldan:1975, Author = {Rold{\'a}n, Mercedes}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:51:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 14:52:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {342--345}, Title = {Clitic climbing and unrelated matters}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Martin:1975, Author = {Martin, John N.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:50:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:50:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {339--341}, Title = {Karttunen on possibility}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Lieberman:1975, Author = {Lieberman, Philip}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:48:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:49:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {335--339}, Title = {More discussion of {N}eanderthal speech}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Hinds:1975, Author = {Hinds, John and Okada, Nobuo}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:43:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:48:45 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {330--335}, Title = {Backward pronominalization across coordinate structures}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Casson:1975, Author = {Casson, Ronald W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:40:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:43:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {323--329}, Title = {Kinship semantics in linguistics and anthropology}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Armstrong:1975, Author = {Armstrong, John}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:38:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:40:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {317--323}, Title = {A note on {I}nitial {M}utation in {M}odern {I}rish}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Truitner:1975, Author = {Truitner, Kenneth L. and Dunnigan, Timothy}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:33:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:37:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {301--316}, Title = {Palatalization in {O}jibwa}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Allen:1975, Author = {Allen, Margaret Reece}, Date-Added = {2010-04-07 11:26:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-07 11:33:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {181--201}, Title = {Vowel mutation and word stress in {W}elsh}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Miller:1975, Author = {Miller, D. Gary}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 17:02:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 17:02:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {171--177}, Title = {All rules precede all syntagmatic natural processes}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Kohrt:1975a, Author = {Kohrt, Manfred}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 17:01:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 17:02:10 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {167--171}, Title = {A note on {B}ounding}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Hurford:1975, Author = {Hurford, James R.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 17:00:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 17:01:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {166--167}, Title = {A polite {S}urface {S}tructure {C}onstraint}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Hirschbuhler:1974, Author = {Hirschb{\"u}hler, Paul}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:59:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 17:00:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {155--165}, Title = {On the source lefthand {NP}s in {F}rench}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1974}} @article{Harnish:1975, Author = {Harnish, Robert M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:56:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:58:45 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {145--154}, Title = {The argument from \emph{Lurk}}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Browne:1975, Author = {Browne, Wayles}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:51:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 14:39:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {136--140}, Title = {Theme-{R}heme {S}tructure and {Z}en{\'e}yze {C}litics}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Allan:1975, Author = {Allan, Edward Jay}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:47:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:51:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {131--136}, Title = {``Verbing things'' in {B}uem}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{Clements:1974, Author = {Clements, George N.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:44:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:46:59 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--51}, Title = {Analogical reanalysis in syntax: the case of {E}we {T}ree-{G}rafting}, Volume = {6}, Year = {1975}} @article{McCawley:1974a, Author = {McCawley, James D.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:42:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:43:21 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {632--635}, Title = {\emph{If} and \emph{Only If}}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Laferriere:1974, Author = {Laferriere, Martha}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:41:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:42:21 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {628--633}, Title = {A note on {A}lternate {R}ule {O}rdering}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Knowles:1974, Author = {Knowles, John}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:40:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:41:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {622--629}, Title = {On acceptable agrammatically}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Gross:1974, Author = {Gross, Maurice}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:35:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:40:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {620--622}, Title = {A remark about plural agreement between determiner and noun}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Browne:1974, Author = {Browne, Wayles}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:35:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:35:42 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {619--620}, Title = {On the topology of {A}naphoric {P}eninsulas}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Bresnan:1974, Author = {Bresnan, Joan W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:34:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:35:01 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {614--619}, Title = {The position of certain clause-particles in phrase structure}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Bach:1974a, Author = {Bach, Emmon and Bresnan, Joan W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:31:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:32:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {609--614}, Title = {``Sloppy identity'': an unnecessary and insufficient criterion for deletion rules}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Sag:1974, Author = {Sag, Ivan A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:29:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:30:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {591--607}, Title = {The {G}rassman's {L}aw {O}rdering {P}seudoparadox}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Selkirk:1974, Author = {Selkirk, Elisabeth}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:26:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-13 14:36:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {573--590}, Title = {French {L}iaison and the X$'$ Notation}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Lasnik:1974, Author = {Lasnik, Howard and Fiengo, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:25:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:26:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {535--571}, Title = {Complement {O}bject {D}eletion}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Kaufman:1974, Author = {Kaufman, Ellen S.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:24:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:25:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {507--533}, Title = {Navajo {S}patial {E}nclitics: a case for {U}nbounded {R}ightward {M}ovement}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Jackendoff:1974, Author = {Jackendoff, Ray}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:22:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:24:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {481--505}, Title = {A {D}eep {S}tructure {P}rojection {R}ule}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Kuno:1974b, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:17:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:18:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {469--477}, Title = {Lexical and {C}ontextual {M}eaning}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Grosu:1974a, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:16:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:17:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {464--469}, Title = {On self-embedding and {D}ouble {F}unction}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Garvey:1974, Author = {Garvey, Catherine and Caramazza, Alfonso}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:15:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:16:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {459--464}, Title = {Implicit causality in verbs}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Barkai:1974, Author = {Barka{\"\i}, Malachi}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:14:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:15:06 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {456--459}, Title = {On duration and spirantization in {B}iblical {H}ebrew}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Ayres:1974, Author = {Ayres, Glenn}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:13:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:14:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {454--456}, Title = {I daresay!}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Anderson:1974a, Author = {Anderson, Anders-B{\"o}rje}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:02:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:13:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {451--453}, Title = {Against the {P}enthouse {P}rinciple}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Anderson:1974, Author = {Anderson, Stephen R.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:02:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:02:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {445--451}, Title = {On dis-agreement rules}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Cole:1974, Author = {Cole, Peter}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 16:00:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:02:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {425--443}, Title = {Backward pronominalization and analogy}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Postal:1974a, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:58:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 16:00:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {367--424}, Title = {On certain ambiguities}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Olofsson:1974, Author = {Olofsson, Arne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:57:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:57:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {320--322}, Title = {Latin rules in {E}nglish phonology?}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Hurford:1974, Author = {Hurford, James R.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:56:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:57:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {319--320}, Title = {More \emph{gh}-words}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Grosu:1974, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:55:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:56:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {308--319}, Title = {On the nature of the {L}eft {B}ranch {C}ondition}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Gee:1974, Author = {Gee, James Paul}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:54:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:55:28 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {304--308}, Title = {Jackendoff's {T}hematic {H}ierarchy {C}ondition and the {P}assive {C}onstruction}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Furbee:1974, Author = {Furbee, N. Louanna}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:52:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:54:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {299--304}, Title = {Identity in gapping and the lexical insertion of verbs}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Brame:1974a, Author = {Brame, Michael K. and Bordelois, Ivonne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:49:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:52:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {282--298}, Title = {Some controversional questions in {S}panish phonology}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Harris:1974a, Author = {Harris, James W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:48:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:50:32 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {271--282}, Title = {On certain claims concerning {S}panish phonology}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Wilkinson:1974, Author = {Wilkinson, Robert W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:47:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:48:28 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {251--270}, Title = {Tense/lax vowel harmony in {T}elugu: the influence of {D}erived {C}ontrast on {R}ule {A}pplication}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Moyne:1974, Author = {Moyne, John and Carden, Guy}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:42:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:46:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {205--249}, Title = {Subject Reduplication in {P}ersian}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Kean:1974, Author = {Kean, Mary-Louise}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:42:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:42:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {179--203}, Title = {The strict cycle in Phonology}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Hintikka:1974, Author = {Hintikka, Jaako}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:41:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:42:06 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {153--177}, Title = {Quantifiers vs. {Q}uantification {T}heory}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Morris:1974, Author = {Morris, Donald H.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:39:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:40:11 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {144--150}, Title = {Neanderthal speech}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Kuno:1974a, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:38:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:39:32 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {137--144}, Title = {A note on {S}ubject {R}aising}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Kuno:1974, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:36:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:37:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {117--136}, Title = {The position of relative clauses and conjunctions}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Hyman:1974, Author = {Hyman, Larry M. and Schuh, Russell G.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:35:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:38:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {81--115}, Title = {Universals of {T}one {R}ules: evidence from {W}est {A}frica}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Harris:1974, Author = {Harris, James W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:33:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:34:31 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {61--80}, Title = {Evidence from {P}ortuguese for the ``{E}lsewhere {C}ondition'' in Phonology}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Brame:1974, Author = {Brame, Michael K.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:30:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:38:04 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39--60}, Title = {The cycle in phonology: stress in {P}alestinian, {M}altese, and {S}panish}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Berman:1974, Author = {Berman, Arlene}, Date-Added = {2010-04-06 15:19:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:34:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--38}, Title = {On the {VSO} {H}ypothesis}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1974}} @article{Kuno:1973b, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:51:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:59:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {363--385}, Title = {Constraint on {I}nternal {C}lauses and {S}entential {S}ubjects}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Bresnan:1973a, Author = {Bresnan, Joan W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:49:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:51:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {275--343}, Title = {Syntax of {C}omparative {C}lause {C}onstruction in {E}nglish}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Reis:1973, Author = {Reis, Marga}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:19:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:20:21 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {261--271}, Title = {Entanglement on {F}actives}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Hankamer:1973b, Author = {Hankamer, Jorge and Postal, Paul}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:19:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:19:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {261}, Title = {Whose Gorilla?}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Katz:1973, Author = {Katz, Jerrold J.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:18:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:19:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {256--260}, Title = {On Defining ``Presupposition''}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Hudson:1973, Author = {Hudson, R. A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:17:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:18:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {251--256}, Title = {Tense and time reference in {R}educed {R}elative {C}lauses}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Hamp:1973, Author = {Hamp, Eric P.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:16:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:16:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {246--251}, Title = {A Semantic Archaism}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Grosu:1973a, Author = {Grosu, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:08:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:15:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {243--246}, Title = {Another Remark on {D}ragging}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Ehrenkranz:1973, Author = {Ehrenkranz, Jean}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 12:06:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:11:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {241--242}, Title = {Somes, Or = And}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{McCawley:1973, Author = {McCawley, James D.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:57:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 12:06:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {221--240}, Title = {External {NP}s versus Annotated Deep Structures}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Karttunen:1973a, Author = {Karttunen, Lauri}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:55:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:56:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {169--193}, Title = {Presuppositions of Compound Sentences}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Brame:1973a, Author = {Brame, Michael K. and Bordelois, Ivonne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:53:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:54:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {111--168}, Title = {Vocalic Alternations in {S}panish}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Vetter:1973, Author = {Vetter, David C.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:51:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:51:48 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {104--108}, Title = {Someone Solves This Problem Tomorrow}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Sampson:1973, Author = {Sampson, Geoffrey}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:50:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:51:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {101--104}, Title = {Duration in {H}ebrew Consonants}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Pulte:1973, Author = {Pulte, William}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:50:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:50:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {100--101}, Title = {A Note on Gapping}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Morin:1973, Author = {Morin, Yves Ch.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:49:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:49:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {97--100}, Title = {Tag Questions in {F}rench}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Haraguchi:1973, Author = {Haraguchi, Shosuke}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:45:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:46:14 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {95--97}, Title = {``Dragging'' Reconsidered}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Hall:1973, Author = {Hall, Robert A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:42:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:45:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {93--94}, Title = {The Transferred Epithet}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Contreras:1973, Author = {Contreras, Heles}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:41:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:42:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {83--88}, Title = {Grammaticality Versus Acceptability: The {S}panish \emph{Se} Case}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Koutsoudas:1973, Author = {Koutsoudas, Andreas}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:38:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:40:42 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {69--81}, Title = {Extrinsic Order and the Complex {NP} Constraint}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Halle:1973a, Author = {Halle, Morris}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:37:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:38:14 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--16}, Title = {Prolegomena to a Theory of Word Formation}, Volume = {4}, Year = {1973}} @article{Thorne:1972, Author = {Thorne, James Peter}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:34:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:34:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {552--556}, Title = {On Nonrestrictive Relative Clauses}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Mithun:1972, Author = {Mithun, Marianne}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:33:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:34:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {549--552}, Title = {The Respective Interpretations of Distribution and Sequence}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Milsark:1972, Author = {Milsark, Gary}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:32:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:33:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {542--549}, Title = {Re: Doubl-ing}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Lilje:1972, Author = {Lilje, Gerald W.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:31:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:31:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {540--542}, Title = {Uninvited Inferences}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Langendoen:1972, Author = {Langendoen, D. Terence}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:30:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:31:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {538}, Title = {When Optional Copula Deletion Isn't}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{King:1972, Author = {King, Robert D.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:29:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:30:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {535--539}, Title = {A Note on Opacity and Paradigm Regularity}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Fodor:1972, Author = {Fodor, Janet Dean}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:29:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:29:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {528--535}, Title = {Beware}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Fiengo:1972, Author = {Fiengo, Robert and Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:28:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:29:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {528}, Title = {On Nonrecoverable Deletion in Syntax}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Cruse:1972, Author = {Cruse, D. A.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:27:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:28:33 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {520--528}, Title = {A Note on {E}nglish Causatives}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Chvany:1972, Author = {Chvany, Catherine V.}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:27:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:27:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {516--520}, Title = {On Movement Out of a Tensed {S}}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Chung:1972, Author = {Chung, Sandra}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:26:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:27:04 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {510--516}, Title = {On Conjunct Splitting in Samoan}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Christie:1972, Author = {Christie, William}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:25:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:26:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {508--510}, Title = {A Non-Non-Source for Comparatives}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Catlin:1972, Author = {Catlin, Jane-Carol and Catlin, Jack}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:15:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:23:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {504--508}, Title = {Intentionality: A Source of Ambiguity in {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Aissen:1972, Author = {Aissen, Judith and Hankamer, Jorge}, Date-Added = {2010-04-02 11:13:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 11:14:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {501--504}, Title = {Shifty Subjects: A Conspiracy in Syntax?}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kirsner:1972, Author = {Kirsner, Robert S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:42:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:43:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {489--499}, Title = {About ``About'' and the Unity of ``Remind''}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kuno:1972a, Author = {Kuno, Susumu and Robinson, Jane J.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:39:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:41:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {463--487}, Title = {Multiple Wh Questions}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Keenan:1972, Author = {Keenan, Edward L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:38:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:39:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {413--461}, Title = {On Semantically Based Grammar}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Wilson:1972, Author = {Wilson, Deirdre}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:33:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:34:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {405--410}, Title = {Presuppositions on Factives}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Walker:1972, Author = {Walker, Douglas C.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:32:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 09:42:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {402--404}, Title = {On the Source of {O}ld {F}rench}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Sommerstein:1972a, Author = {Sommerstein, Alan H.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:31:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 09:42:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {400--402}, Title = {An Implicationally Determined Rule in {G}reek}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Postal:1972e, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:30:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:31:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {396--400}, Title = {A Few Factive Facts}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kisseberth:1972a, Author = {Kisseberth, Charles W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:27:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:30:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {393--396}, Title = {An Argument Against the Principle of Simultaneous Application of Phonological Rules}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Householder:1972, Author = {Householder, Fred W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:25:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:27:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {392--393}, Title = {A Problem in Rule Ordering??}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Contreras:1972, Author = {Contreras, Heles and Rojas, Jorge Nelson}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:22:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:25:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {385--392}, Title = {Some Remarks on {S}panish Clitics}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Borkin:1972, Author = {Borkin, Ann}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:21:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:22:32 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {378--385}, Title = {Two Notes on \emph{Want} and \emph{Desire}}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Barkai:1972, Author = {Barka{\"\i}, Malachi}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:19:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:37:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {377--378}, Title = {On the Shiftability of Past Participles in {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Akmajian:1972, Author = {Akmajian, Adrian}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:19:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:19:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {373--377}, Title = {Getting Tough}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Postal:1972, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:17:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 09:41:57 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {349--371}, Title = {Some Further Limitations of Interpretive Theories of Anaphora}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Schreiber:1972, Author = {Schreiber, Peter A.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:16:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:17:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {321--347}, Title = {Style Disjuncts and the Performative Analysis}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kuno:1972, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:15:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:16:45 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {269--320}, Title = {Functional Sentence Perspective: A Case Study from {J}apanese and {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Anderson:1972, Author = {Anderson, Stephen R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:14:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:15:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {253--268}, Title = {On Nasalization in {S}undanese}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Cornulier:1972a, Author = {de Cornulier, Benoit}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:08:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:09:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {249}, Title = {Metalinguistic Autoreference}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Phelps:1972, Author = {Phelps, E.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:07:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:08:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {246--249}, Title = {Catalan Vowel Reduction-Alpha, Braces, or Angled Brackets?}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Perlmutter:1973, Author = {Perlmutter, David M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:04:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:07:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {243--246}, Title = {A Note on Syntactic and Semantic Number in {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Otero:1972, Author = {Otero, Carlos}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 14:00:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:07:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {233--242}, Title = {Acceptable Ungrammatical Sentences in {S}panish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Menn:1972, Author = {Menn, Lise}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:59:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:00:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {228--233}, Title = {On Me}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Hudson:1972a, Author = {Hudson, R. A.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:59:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:59:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {227}, Title = {Evidence for Ungrammaticality}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kajita:1972, Author = {Kajita, Masaru}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:57:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:58:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {227--228}, Title = {Transformationally Underivable Pseudo-Cleft Sentences}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Cornulier:1972, Author = {de Cornulier, Benoit}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:52:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:57:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {226--227}, Title = {A Peeking Rule in {F}rench}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Browne:1972, Author = {Browne, E. Wayles}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:51:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:52:40 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {223--226}, Title = {Conjoined Question Words and a Limitation on {E}nglish Surface Structures}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Postal:1972c, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:50:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:51:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {211--222}, Title = {On Some Rules That Are Not Successive Cyclic}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Sommerstein:1972, Author = {Sommerstein, Alan H.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:49:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:50:40 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {197--209}, Title = {On the So-Called Definite Article in {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kuno:172, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:48:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:49:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {161--195}, Title = {Pronominalization, Reflexivization, and Direct Discourse}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Hasegawa:1972, Author = {Hasegawa, Kinsuke}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:45:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:47:06 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {141--159}, Title = {Transformations and Semantic Interpretation}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Smith:1972, Author = {Smith, Carlota S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:44:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:45:14 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {136--138}, Title = {On Causative Verbs and Derived Nominals in {E}nglish}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Postal:1972b, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:43:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:44:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {130--136}, Title = {Two Remarks on Dragging}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Pope:1972, Author = {Pope, Emily}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:42:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-02 09:41:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {125--130}, Title = {{GH}-Words}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Lakoff:1972a, Author = {Lakoff, George and Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:41:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:42:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {121--125}, Title = {A Note on Anaphoric Islands and Causatives}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Jackendoff:1972a, Author = {Jackendoff, Ray S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:40:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:41:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {119--120}, Title = {Any vs. Every}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Hudson:1972, Author = {Hudson, R. A.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:39:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:39:59 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {116--118}, Title = {Why It Is That That That That Follows the Subject Is Impossible}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Gallagher:1972, Author = {Gallagher, Mary}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:38:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:39:01 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {115}, Title = {The {S}quid, The {S}quib, and Others}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Bolinger:1972, Author = {Bolinger, Dwight}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:34:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:38:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {108--114}, Title = {What Did John Keep the Car That Was In}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Maling:1972a, Author = {Maling, Joan M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:33:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:34:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {101-108}, Title = {On ``Gapping and the Order of Constituents''}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Underhill:1972, Author = {Underhill, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:30:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:33:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {87--99}, Title = {Turkish Participles}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Ross:1972, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:26:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:28:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {61--86}, Title = {Doubl-ing}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Postal:1972a, Author = {Postal, Paul}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:21:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:25:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {34--59}, Title = {A Global Constraint on Pronominalization}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Kisseberth:1972, Author = {Kisseberth, Charles W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 13:17:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 13:20:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--33}, Title = {Cyclical Rules in {K}lamath Phonology}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1972}} @article{Ross:1970f, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:38:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:39:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {146}, Title = {\emph{Whether}-Deletion}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Postal:1970b, Author = {Postal, Paul M. and Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:37:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:38:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {145--146}, Title = {A Problem of Adverb Preposing}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Zwicky:1970c, Author = {Zwicky, Arnold M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:36:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:37:21 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {145}, Title = {\emph{Usually} and \emph{Unsually}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Morgan:1970, Author = {Morgan, Jerry L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:36:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:36:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {144--145}, Title = {If and When}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Ross:1970e, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:35:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:36:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {144}, Title = {Two Types of Idioms}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970g, Author = {Lakoff, George}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:34:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:35:06 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {140}, Title = {Two Kinds of Nominalizations}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Hall:1970, Author = {Hall, R. M. R. and Hall, Beatrice L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:33:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:34:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {138--139}, Title = {A Note on \emph{Will} vs. \emph{Going To}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Baker:1970a, Author = {Baker, C. L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:32:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:33:05 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {136--138}, Title = {A Note on Scope of Quantifiers and Negation}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{King:1970a, Author = {King, Harold V.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:31:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:32:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {134--136}, Title = {On Blocking Rules for Contraction in {E}nglish}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Harris:1970, Author = {Harris, James W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:30:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:30:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {129--134}, Title = {Sequences of Vowels In {S}panish}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970f, Author = {Lakoff, Robin T.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:29:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:30:11 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {128--129}, Title = {Another Non-Source for Comparatives}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Ross:1970d, Author = {Ross, John Robert and Perlmutter, David M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:28:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:29:40 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {127--128}, Title = {A Non-Source for Comparatives}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Green:1970, Author = {Green, Georgia M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:28:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:33:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {126--127}, Title = {More {X} Than Not {X}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970e, Author = {Lakoff, George and Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:27:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:28:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {126}, Title = {Comparatives and (N)ever}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Akmajian:1970b, Author = {Akmajian, Adrian and Jackendoff, Ray}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:25:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:27:10 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {124--126}, Title = {Coreferentiality and Stress}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bresnan:1970a, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:19:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:25:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {122--123}, Title = {An Argument Against Pronominalization}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bach:1970, Author = {Bach, Emmon}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:17:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:19:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {121--123}, Title = {Problominalization}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Langendoen:1970, Author = {Langendoen, D. Terence}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:16:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:16:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {25--35}, Title = {The `Can't Seem to' Construction}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Jakobson:1970, Author = {Jakobson, Roman}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 12:14:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:15:59 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--23}, Title = {On the Verbal Art of {W}illiam {B}lake and Other Poet-Painters}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{McCawley:1970a, Author = {McCawley, James D.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:48:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:49:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {278--280}, Title = {One the Applicability of \emph{Vice Versa}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Fraser:1970a, Author = {Fraser, Bruce}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:47:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:48:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {277--278}, Title = {Vice Versa}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Dixon:1970, Author = {Dixon, R. M. W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:46:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:35:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {273--276}, Title = {Olgolo {S}yllable {S}tructure and What They Are Doing About It}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Ross:1970c, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:45:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:46:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {273}, Title = {Metalinguistic Anaphora}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Browne:1970, Author = {Browne, Wayles}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:44:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:45:47 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {267--270}, Title = {Noun Phrase Definiteness in Relatives and Questions: Evidence from {M}acedonian}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970b, Author = {Lakoff, George}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:44:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:44:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {265--267}, Title = {A Derived Nominal Requiring a Sentential Source}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Fraser:1970, Author = {Fraser, Bruce}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:43:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:43:57 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {264--265}, Title = {Idioms and Unspecified {NP} Deletion}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Zwicky:1970, Author = {Zwicky, Arnold M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:42:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:39:57 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {262--264}, Title = {Class Complements In Phonology}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bresnan:1970, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:41:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:42:10 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {261--262}, Title = {A Grammatical Fiction}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Ross:1970b, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:41:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:41:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {261}, Title = {Chance}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Sampson:1970, Author = {Sampson, Geoffrey}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:40:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:41:08 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {257--260}, Title = {Good}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Baker:1970, Author = {Baker, C. L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:31:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:38:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {169--186}, Title = {Double Negatives}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Staal:1970, Author = {Staal, J. F.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:28:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:58:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {373--381}, Title = {Performatives and Token-Reflexives}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Wilson:1970, Author = {Wilson, Deirdre}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:28:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:58:29 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {369--373}, Title = {If That}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Browne:1970a, Author = {Browne, Wayles}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:25:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:55:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {359--363}, Title = {More on Definiteness Markers: Interrogatives in {P}ersian}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970c, Author = {Lakoff, George}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:24:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:55:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {357--359}, Title = {A Note on Vagueness and Ambiguity}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Schiebe:1970, Author = {Schiebe, Traugott}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:23:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:39:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {351--357}, Title = {On a {G}lobal {D}erivational {C}onstraint Involving Quantifiers in {G}erman}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Perlmutter:1970d, Author = {Perlmutter, David M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:23:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:39:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {350}, Title = {Relative {C}lauses with Split Antecedents}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bailey:1970, Author = {Bailey, Charles-James N.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:19:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:53:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {347--349}, Title = {Toward Specifying Constraints on Phonological Metathesis}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Kisseberth:1970a, Author = {Kisseberth, Charles W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:18:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:52:27 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {337--345}, Title = {Review Article}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Zwicky:1970a, Author = {Zwicky, Arnald M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:16:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:40:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {323--336}, Title = {Auxiliary {R}eduction in {E}nglish}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lieberman:1970, Author = {Lieberman, Philip}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:16:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:51:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {307--322}, Title = {Towards a Unified Phonetic Theory}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Kisseberth:1970, Author = {Kisseberth, Charles W.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:11:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:50:31 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {291--306}, Title = {On the Functional Unity of Phonological Rules}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Carden:1970, Author = {Carden, Guy}, Date-Added = {2010-03-31 11:09:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:50:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {281--290}, Title = {A Note on Conflicting Idiolects}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Wolf:1970, Author = {Wolf, Meyer}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:53:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:14:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {561}, Title = {A Note on the Surface Verb ``Remind''}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bowers:1970, Author = {Bowers, John}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:52:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:13:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {559--560}, Title = {A Note on ``Remind''}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{McCawley:1970b, Author = {McCawley, James D.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:52:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:13:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {556--559}, Title = {Similar in That {S}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Carden:1970c, Author = {Carden, Guy and Miller, Anthony G.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:51:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:13:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {555--556}, Title = {More Problominzalizations}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Zwicky:1970b, Author = {Zwicky, Arnold M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:49:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:12:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {549--555}, Title = {Greek-letter Variables and the {S}anskrit \emph{ruki} Class}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Brame:1970, Author = {Brame, Michael K. and Lasnik, Howard}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:48:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:43:05 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {547--549}, Title = {A {D}erived {N}ominal Requiring a Nonsentential Source}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Anderson:1970a, Author = {Anderson, Stephen R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:47:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:11:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {545--547}, Title = {Two Notes on Split Antecedents}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Naro:1970, Author = {Naro, Anthony J.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:46:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:11:31 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {543--545}, Title = {A Note on Elision of {Y}od in {S}panish}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970d, Author = {Lakoff, George}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:45:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:43:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {539--542}, Title = {An Example of a Descriptively Inadequate {I}nterpretive {T}heory}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Hill:1970, Author = {Hill, Jane Hill}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:36:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:38:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {534--539}, Title = {A Peeking Rules in {C}upe{\~{n}}o}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Carden:1970b, Author = {Carden, Guy}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:35:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:09:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {527--533}, Title = {A Problem with Primacy}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Watkins:1970, Author = {Watkins, Calvert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:34:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:44:08 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {525--527}, Title = {A Case of {N}onchronological {R}ule {I}nsertion}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Kimball:1970, Author = {Kimball, John}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:32:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:05:06 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {511--523}, Title = {``Remind'' Remains}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Huddleston:1970, Author = {Huddleston, Rodney}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:31:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:51:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {501--511}, Title = {Some Remarks on {C}ase-{G}rammar}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Postal:1970a, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:29:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:51:33 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {439--500}, Title = {On {C}oreferential {C}omplement {S}ubject {D}eletion}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Fodor:1970, Author = {Fodor, J. A.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:28:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:02:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {429--438}, Title = {Three Reasons for Not Deriving ``Kill'' from ``Cause to Die''}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Carden:1970a, Author = {Carden, Guy}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:27:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:01:48 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {415--427}, Title = {On Post-Determiner Quantifiers}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bierwisch:1970, Author = {Bierwisch, Manfred}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:26:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 12:01:25 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {397--414}, Title = {Fehler-linguistik}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Anderson:1970, Author = {Anderson, Stephen}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:24:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:51:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {387--396}, Title = {On {G}rassmann's {L}aw in {S}anskrit}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bresnan:1971c, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:23:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 19:34:06 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {117--124}, Title = {On ``A Non-Source for Comparatives''}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Cantrall:1971, Author = {Cantrall, William R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:22:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:23:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {116--117}, Title = {Versatile, Vice}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Huddleston:1971a, Author = {Huddleston, Rodney}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:21:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:53:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {115--116}, Title = {A Problem in {R}elative {C}lause {R}eduction}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Kravif:1971, Author = {Kravif, Diane}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:20:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:54:54 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {112--115}, Title = {Weak Generative Capacity and {E}monds' {C}onstraint}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Grinder:1971c, Author = {Grinder, John T.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:19:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:20:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {110--112}, Title = {A Global Constraint on Deletion}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Carstairs:1971, Author = {Carstairs, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:17:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:19:18 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {107--110}, Title = {Syncategorematic Words}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Anderson:1971, Author = {Anderson, Stephen R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:16:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 19:33:31 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {103--107}, Title = {On the Description of ``Apacalized'' Consonants}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1971}} @article{Schreiber:1971, Author = {Schreiber, Peter A.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:15:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:16:36 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {83--101}, Title = {Some Constraints on the Formation of {E}nglish Sentence Adverbs}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Pope:1971, Author = {Pope, Emily}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:15:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:15:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {69--82}, Title = {Answers to Yes-No Questions}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Naro:1971, Author = {Naro, Anthony J.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:14:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:15:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {57--67}, Title = {Directionality and Assimilation}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Kaye:1971, Author = {Kaye, Jonathan D.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:13:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:14:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {37--56}, Title = {Nasal Harmony in {D}esano}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Jackendoff:1971b, Author = {Jackendoff, Ray S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:12:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:13:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {21--35}, Title = {Gapping and Related Rules}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Halle:1971, Author = {Halle, Morris}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:10:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:12:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--19}, Title = {Remarks on {S}lavic Accentology}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Binnick:1971, Author = {Binnick, Robert I.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:09:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:09:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {260--265}, Title = {Bring and Come}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Browne:1971, Author = {Browne, Wayles}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:08:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:09:04 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {259--260}, Title = {Verbs and Unspecified {NP} Deletion}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Mittwoch:1971, Author = {Mittwoch, Anita}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:06:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:07:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {255--259}, Title = {Idioms and Unspecified {NP} Deletion}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Maratsos:1971, Author = {Maratsos, Michael}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:04:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:04:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {254}, Title = {A Note on {NP}'s Made Definite by Entailment}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Huddleston:1971, Author = {Huddleston, Rodney}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:03:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:04:01 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {252--255}, Title = {A Comparative Tautology}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Andrews:1971b, Author = {Andrews, Avery D.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:01:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:03:20 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {250--252}, Title = {Against Conjunct Movement}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Bolinger:1971b, Author = {Bolinger, Dwight}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:00:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:01:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {246--250}, Title = {The Nominal in the Progressive}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Kimball:1971, Author = {Kimball, John and Aissen, Judith}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 16:00:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 16:00:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {241--246}, Title = {I Think, You Think, He Think}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Kayne:1971, Author = {Kayne, Richard S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:56:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:57:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {237--241}, Title = {A Pronominalization Paradox in {F}rench}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Vogt:1971, Author = {Vogt, Eric E.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:55:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:59:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {233--237}, Title = {Caralan {V}owel {R}eduction and the {A}ngled {B}racket {N}otation}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Zwicky:1971, Author = {Zwicky, Arnold M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:53:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:55:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {223--233}, Title = {In a Manner of Speaking}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Lieberman:1971, Author = {Lieberman, Philip and Crelin, Edmund S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:52:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:53:42 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {203--222}, Title = {On the Speech of {Neanderthal} {Man}}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Grinder:1971b, Author = {Grinder, John}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:52:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 19:34:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {183--202}, Title = {Chains of Coreference}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Baker:1971, Author = {Baker, C.L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:51:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:58:03 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {167--181}, Title = {Stress Level and Auxiliary Behavior in {E}nglish}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Bach:1971, Author = {Bach, Emmon}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:50:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:50:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {153--166}, Title = {Questions}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Andrews:1971a, Author = {Andrews, Avery D.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:49:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:00:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {127--151}, Title = {Case {A}greement of Predicate Modifiers in {A}ncient {G}reek}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Carden:1971, Author = {Carden, Guy}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:47:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:49:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {423--426}, Title = {A Dialect Argument For Not-Transportation}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Schnitzer:1971, Author = {Schnitzer, Marc L.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:45:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:46:58 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {422}, Title = {A Problem in Rule Ordering}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Stevens:1971, Author = {Stevens, Alan M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:45:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:45:45 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {420--421}, Title = {Fixed Morpheme Order}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Leben:1971, Author = {Leben, William R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:44:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 19:34:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {419--420}, Title = {``Remind'' Once More}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Daniels:1971, Author = {Daniels, William J.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:32:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:44:25 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {416--419}, Title = {Greek-Letter Variables and the {Russian} \emph{{\v{s}}{\v{z}}c} Class}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Bickerton:1971, Author = {Bickerton, Derek}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:29:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:32:08 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {415--416}, Title = {When is a Singular Not?}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Fraser:1971, Author = {Fraser, Bruce}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:28:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:00:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {604--607}, Title = {A Note on the {S}pray {P}aint {C}ases}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Baldi:1971, Author = {Baldi, Philip}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:26:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:28:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {603--604}, Title = {Conjunction of Reflexives: Syntax or Semantics}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Andrews:1971, Author = {Andrews, Avery}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:25:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:26:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {602--603}, Title = {Nonrestrictive Dream}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Green:1971a, Author = {Green, Georgia M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:24:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:25:13 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {601--602}, Title = {Unspeakable Sentences: Book 2}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Dressler:1971, Author = {Dressler, Wolfgang}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:22:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:01:22 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {597--599}, Title = {An Alleged Case of {N}onchronological {R}ule {I}nsertion: Floralis}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Ross:1971a, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:22:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:01:44 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {599--600}, Title = {The Superficial Nature of {A}naphoric {I}sland {C}onstraints}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Bresnan:1971, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:20:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 14:03:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {589--597}, Title = {A Note on the Notion ``Identity of Sense Anaphora''}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Sampson:1971, Author = {Sampson, Geoffrey}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:19:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:10:32 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {587--589}, Title = {Subordinate {F}uture {D}eletion and Hyperclauses}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Lightner:1971, Author = {Lightner, Theodore M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:19:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:10:09 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {586--587}, Title = {A Problem in {C}oexistent {P}honological {S}ystems}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Bolinger:1971a, Author = {Bolinger, Dwight}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:18:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:19:00 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {584--586}, Title = {A Further Note on the Nominal in the Progressive}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Wilkinson:1971a, Author = {Wilkinson, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:16:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:10:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {575--584}, Title = {Complement {S}ubject {D}eletion and Subset Relations}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Cantrall:1971, Author = {Cantrall, William R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:15:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:16:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {573--575}, Title = {Comparison and Presupposition}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Alford:1971, Author = {Alford, Danny}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:15:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:15:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {573}, Title = {Kicking the Habit}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Grinder:1971a, Author = {Grinder, John}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:14:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:15:28 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {572--573}, Title = {Double Indices}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Ross:1971, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:12:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:13:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {569--572}, Title = {Mirror-Image Rules and {VSO} Order}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Karttunen:1971, Author = {Karttunen, Lauri}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:11:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:12:37 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {566--569}, Title = {Counterfactual Conditionals}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Geis:1971, Author = {Geis, Michael L. and Zwicky, Arnold M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:10:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:11:40 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {561--566}, Title = {On Invited Inferences}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Green:1971, Author = {Green, Georgia M.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:09:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:09:53 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {560--561}, Title = {Unspeakable Sentences: Book 1}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Wilkinson:1971, Author = {Wilkinson, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:08:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:09:15 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {558--559}, Title = {It Seems}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Harada:1971, Author = {Harada, S. I.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:06:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:08:12 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {546--557}, Title = {A Non-Source for Reflexives}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Postal:1971a, Author = {Postal, Paul M. and Ross, John R.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:04:43 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:06:11 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {544--545}, Title = {Tough Movement Si, Tough Deletion No!}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Morris:1971, Author = {Morris, Halle}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 15:01:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:04:34 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {540--544}, Title = {Word Boundaries as Environments in Rules}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Chiba:1971, Author = {Chiba, Shuji}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 14:46:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 15:11:30 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {539--540}, Title = {A Note on {E}quip-{NP} {D}eletion}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Black:1971, Author = {Black, Max}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 14:40:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 15:02:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {515--538}, Title = {Review Article: The Structure of Symbol Systems}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Jackendoff:1971a, Author = {Jackendoff, Ray S.}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 14:37:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 14:43:59 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {479--514}, Title = {Modal Structure in Semantic Representation}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Cook:1971, Author = {Cook, Eung-Do}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 14:29:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 14:31:39 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {465--478}, Title = {Phonological Constraint and Syntactic Rule}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Bever:1970, Author = {Bever, Thomas G. and Langendoen, D. Terence}, Date-Added = {2010-03-30 14:23:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-30 14:33:01 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {433--463}, Title = {A Dynamic Model of the Evolution of Language}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1971}} @article{Modesto:2010, Abstract = {In an article in this journal, Boeckx & Hornstein (2006a) present data from Brazilian Portuguese (BP) as an argument in favor of the Movement Theory of Control (MTC). In this reply, I show that the data presented by those authors do not necessarily argue for a movement analysis of BP finite subjects nor of nonfinite control. I also show that BP provides arguments against the MTC when inflected infinitives are considered. Inflected infinitives may be used in BP in partial control structures, which makes it explicit that a singular matrix argument may control a syntactically plural null subject and shows that these two positions cannot be related by movement. Additionally, I show that the MTC makes the wrong predictions when a language with inflected infinitives is considered.}, Author = {Modesto, Marcello}, Date-Added = {2010-03-29 10:07:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-29 10:08:35 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {78--96}, Title = {What {B}razilian {P}ortuguese Says about {C}ontrol: Remarks on {B}oeckx \& {H}ornstein}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Watanabe:2010, Abstract = {This paper proposes that numerals are licensed by the feature [+/-augmented]. This proposal accommodates the dissociation of numerals from the plural morphology and accounts for the phenomenon of 1-deletion. The [+/-augmented] feature is located in the # head and selects a numeral in its specifier. In contrast to numerals and measure phrases accompanied by numerals, vague-quantity expressions are shown to be placed in a position higher than #P.}, Author = {Watanabe, Akira}, Date-Added = {2010-03-29 10:05:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-29 10:06:27 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {37--77}, Title = {Vague {Q}uantity, {N}umerals, and {N}atural {N}umbers}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @article{Georgi:2010, Abstract = {In this paper we argue that the concept of reprojection, often applied in the verbal domain, should be extended to the nominal domain. We develop an analysis according to which a moved N does not adjoin to a functional category; rather, it moves out of its projection and remerges with it. This movement is (indirectly) triggered by a certain kind of categorial probe feature that we call a ''Muenchhausen feature'' (Fanselow 2003). In this way, conceptual problems resulting from head movement conceived as adjunction of one head to another are avoided. Furthermore, one of the main arguments for D as the head of the nominal projection (namely, that evidence for N movement is also evidence for DP on top of NP) is refuted. In addition to showing that an NP approach to nominal projections is viable (given reprojection), we also provide one independent argument for it: the reprojection approach to NP structure turns out to automatically derive a core assumption that must otherwise be stipulated in the theories of word-order variation in nominal projections developed by Cinque (2005) and Abels & Neeleman (2006) (namely, that only those projections can undergo movement within nominal projections that contain N).}, Author = {Georgi, Doreen and M{\"u}ller, Gereon}, Date-Added = {2010-03-29 10:01:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-29 10:02:11 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--36}, Title = {Noun-Phrase Structure by Reprojection}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2010}} @inproceedings{Gartner:2001, Author = {G{\"a}rtner, Hans-Martin}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of {WCCFL} 18}, Date-Added = {2010-03-14 10:33:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-14 10:34:36 -0400}, Title = {Phase-linking Meets {M}inimalism}, Year = {2001}} @article{Walker:2010, Author = {Walker, Rachel}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:58:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:59:45 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {169--179}, Title = {Nonmyopic Harmony and the Nature of Derivations}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Niinuma:2010, Author = {Niinuma, Fumikazu}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:57:42 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:58:42 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {163--169}, Title = {Across-the-Board Parasitic Gap Constructions in {R}omanian}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Jurgec:2010, Author = {Jurgec, Peter}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:54:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:56:43 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {149--161}, Title = {Disjunctive Lexical Stratification}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Sobin:2010, Abstract = {English echo questions present numerous challenges to the analysis of interrogatives, including (a) simple wh-in-situ (You saw who?); (b) apparent Superiority violations (What did who see?); (c) apparent verb movement without wh-movement (Has Mary seen what?); and (d) requisite wide scope only for echo-question-introduced wh-phrases (underlined in these examples---only who in What did who see? is being asked about). Such apparently contrary features may be explained in terms of independently necessary scope assignment mechanisms and a complementizer that subordinates the utterance being echoed and ``freezes'' its CP structure. No norms of question formation are violated.}, Author = {Sobin, Nicholas}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:53:22 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:54:34 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {131--148}, Title = {Echo Questions in the {M}inimalist {P}rogram}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Boeckx:2010, Abstract = {This article discusses the challenges that Bobaljik and Landau (2009) pose to Boeckx and Hornstein's (2006) movement-based analysis of control in Icelandic. We show in detail that contrary to what Bobaljik and Landau claim, the movement theory of control (with a modification to accommodate quirky Case, a specialty of Icelandic) makes the right empirical cuts regarding the issues they raise, namely, (a) the differences in Case agreement between control and raising construc- tions, (b) the different patterns of Case transmission (un)available, and (c) the fact that allegedly Case-marked PROs are phonetically null. We argue that rather than being problematic, the data bearing on these issues actually provide independent support to the movement theory of control.}, Author = {Boeckx, Cedric and Hornstein, Norbert and Nunes, Jairo}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:50:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:51:29 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {111-130}, Title = {Icelandic {C}ontrol Really Is {A}-Movement: Reply to {B}obaljik and {L}andau}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Takano:2010, Abstract = {This article argues for two points: that scrambling out of a control clause patterns with scrambling out of a finite clause and that obligatory control is derived by movement of the controller. The argument is based on hitherto unnoticed facts about binding effects with scram- bling out of a control clause in Japanese. It is proposed that those facts can only be accounted for by looking at an interaction of long-distance scrambling and movement of the controller. It is also shown that the proposal has important consequences for the nature of scrambling, pronominal variable binding, and subject control.}, Author = {Takano, Yuji}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:48:37 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:49:32 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {83--110}, Title = {Scrambling and {C}ontrol}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Muller:2010, Abstract = {This article shows that a version of the Condition on Extraction Do- main (Huang 1982) can be derived from the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC; Chomsky 2001, 2008) if the following assumptions are made: (a) All syntactic operations are driven by features of lexical items. (b) These features are ordered on lexical items. (c) All phrases are phases. (d) Edge features that trigger intermediate movement steps can only be added before the phase head becomes inert. Given (a--d), it follows from the PIC that extraction from XP is blocked if the operation that has merged XP is the final operation taking place in a phase: a last-merged specifier is a barrier because no edge feature can be inserted that might extract some item out of it; this induces a PIC violation on the following cycle. The analysis can be extended to cover freezing effects. Furthermore, it predicts the existence of the melting effect, illustrated in German and Czech: local scrambling in front of what would otherwise qualify as a last-merged specifier renders the specifier transparent for extraction. The most important assumption made here is that the timing of edge feature insertion is crucial (before vs. after in (d)). Accordingly, the analysis can be viewed as an argument supporting a strictly derivational organization of grammar.}, Author = {M{\"u}ller, Gereon}, Date-Added = {2010-02-07 10:46:39 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-02-07 10:47:54 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {35--82}, Title = {On Deriving {CED} Effects from the {PIC}}, Volume = {41}, Year = {2010}} @article{Kroeger:2009, Abstract = {This commentary primarily addresses G{\"a}rtner's critique of the ``pseudo- cleft'' analysis for Malagasy. First, it is shown that this analysis is almost certainly correct for focus constructions in three other Western Malayo-Polynesian languages. Next, it is shown that certain unexpected semantic patterns observed in Malagasy (including the potential for strong quantifiers to occur within the focused predicate phrase, and the non-entailment of exhaustivity) hold in these other languages as well. Thus, the semantic arguments against the pseudo-cleft analysis for Malagasy are not conclusive. Finally, on the basis of comparative evidence from Tagalog, it is suggested that the structure of adjunct-focus in Malagasy may actually be quite different from that of subject-focus, even though both constructions must satisfy the same morphological constraints.}, Author = {Kroeger, Paul}, Date-Added = {2010-01-24 09:46:45 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-24 09:48:21 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {817--838}, Title = {Malagasy clefts from a {W}estern {M}alayo-{P}olynesian perspective: Commentary on the paper by {H}ans-{M}artin {G}{\"a}rtner}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Gartner:2009, Abstract = {This paper explores the pros and cons of assimilating Malagasy ``Focusing'' No-Constructions (FNCs) to Temporal No-Constructions (TNCs), which arise from the combination of two full-fledged clauses. The particle no functions as a clause-linker introducing an adverbial clause. It is shown that a neo-Davidsonian semantics assimilating FNCs to TNCs can be developed. Among the attractive consequences of this is the possibility of giving pre-no quantifiers a standard (non predicative) semantics. The clause combining approach also squares well with the finding that the ``focusing'' nature of FNCs is less regular than often assumed. In particular, non-backgrounded (non-``presupposed'') no-clauses can be found. Among the drawbacks of a clause combining approach is its apparent inability to properly constrain ``binding'' relations between the two clauses. In particular, locality restrictions typical for movement relations are unpredicted. The paper discusses these features in some detail against the backdrop of rivaling movement and pseudocleft approaches. My hope is that it helps in clarifying their strengths and weaknesses. Also, I show that formal semantics is a useful, hitherto often neglected, tool with some potential of furthering our understanding the nature of Malagasy FNCs.}, Author = {G{\"a}rtner, Hans-Martin}, Date-Added = {2010-01-24 09:43:56 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-24 09:45:55 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {789--816}, Title = {On the prospects of a clause combining approach to ``focusing'' \emph{no}-constructions in {M}alagasy}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hermon:2009, Abstract = {This paper is a critical review and discussion of a novel approach to de- riving typological universals directly from UG based principles and parameters. (See Potsdam 2009), this issue.) It points out the pluses and minuses of such a research program and provides additional examples from Western Malayo-Polynesian languages (Indonesian and Batak), which illustrate the issues involved in extending the approach to a larger number of languages.}, Author = {Hermon, Gabriella}, Date-Added = {2010-01-24 09:42:42 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-24 09:43:54 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {773--787}, Title = {Langauge typology and universal grammar: a commentary on the paper by {E}ric {P}otsdam}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Potsdam:2009, Abstract = {This paper presents a research agenda for investigating possible implicational universals connecting the syntactic strategy that a verb-initial language uses to derive verb-initial word order (verb raising, VP raising, verb lowering, right hand subjects, etc.) and its strategy for forming wh-questions (wh-in-situ, clefting, wh-fronting, etc.). The Austronesian language family, with its over 1000 members, is taken as a starting point for the investigation because of its abundance of verb-initial languages. The existing analyses of Austronesian languages support one potential universal in this domain: Languages that derive verb-initial word order by VP raising do not have wh-movement. Possible theoretical explanations for this pattern are evaluated. The paper then considers Fijian, a potential counterexample. Further analysis suggests that Fijian is unlikely to be a problem, however, it highlights a main claim of the paper: Careful, in-depth analyses are required to yield robust results in such a typological study.}, Author = {Potsdam, Eric}, Date-Added = {2010-01-24 09:41:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-24 09:41:58 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {737--771}, Title = {Austronesian verb-initial languages and \emph{wh}-question strategies}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Keenan:2009, Abstract = {In his article in this volume, Joseph Sabbagh treats existential there sentences (henceforth, ET sentences) as a type of structure whose expression in different languages may vary. Taking the first step in constructing a typology of ET sentences, he claims that ET sentences in the Western Austronesian language Tagalog are built from an unaccusative predicate, whereas ET sentences in English, according to the proposals he cites, are constructed from small clauses. Both analyses have also been proposed for ET sentences in other Western Austronesian languages. For instance, in Malagasy, a Western Austronesian language spoken in Madagascar, Pearson (1996) and Paul (2000) defend a small clause analysis of ET sentences, whereas Polinsky (2008) argues persuasively for an analysis involving an unaccusative predicate. At various points in this commentary, I try to push the typology of ET further by suggesting possible typological correlates of their form.}, Author = {Keenan, Edward L.}, Date-Added = {2010-01-24 09:39:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-24 09:40:18 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {721--735}, Title = {Existential sentences in {T}agalog: commentary on the paper by {J}oseph {S}abbagh}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Sabbagh:2009, Abstract = {This paper investigates the syntax of existential sentences in Tagalog. Itargues that existential sentences in Tagalog are formed on the basis of an unaccusative predicate that selects a noun phrase as its sole internal argument. The positive arguments for this analysis also argue against a small clause analysis of existential sentences in Tagalog (as proposed, for other languages, in work by Stowell 1978, 1981; Chomsky 1981, 1986; Safir 1985; Hoekstra and Mulder 1990; Lasnik 1992; Moro 1997; among others). Additionally, this paper argues for an analysis of the definiteness effect in which the restriction follows from the requirement that the noun phrase that occurs in existential sentences (i.e., the ``pivo'') be a property denoting object. This proposal not only accounts for the class of noun phrases that are acceptable in Tagalog existential sentences, but also helps to shed light on various morphosyntactic aspects of existential sentences in the language, relating --- in particular --- to their impersonal clause structure, morphological case, as well as other properties.}, Author = {Sabbagh, Joseph}, Date-Added = {2010-01-24 09:36:21 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-24 09:38:01 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {675--719}, Title = {Existential sentences in {T}agalog}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @phdthesis{Albizu:1977, Address = {Los Angeles}, Author = {Albizu, P.}, Date-Added = {2010-01-19 07:16:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-19 07:17:02 -0500}, School = {University of Southern California}, Title = {The syntax of Person Agreement}, Year = {1977}} @phdthesis{Bonet:1991, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Bonet, Eulalia}, Date-Added = {2010-01-19 07:15:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-19 07:16:01 -0500}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in {R}omance}, Year = {1991}} @phdthesis{Noyer:1992, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Noyer, Rolf}, Date-Added = {2010-01-19 06:21:47 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-19 06:22:30 -0500}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {Features, positions and affixes in autonomous morphological structure}, Year = {1992}} @article{Chemla:2009, Abstract = {Some theories assume that sentences like (i) with a presupposition trigger in the scope of a quantifier carry an existential presupposition, as in (ii); others assume that they carry a universal presupposition, as in (iii). (i) No student knows that he is lucky. (ii) Existential presupposition: At least one student is lucky. (iii) Universal presupposition: Every student is lucky. This work is an experimental investigation of this issue in French. Native speakers were recruited to evaluate the robustness of the inference from (i) to (iii). The main result is that presuppositions triggered from the scope of the quantifier aucun`no' are in fact universal. But the present results also suggest that the presuppositions triggered from the scope of other quantifiers depend on the quantifier. This calls for important changes in the main theories of presupposition projection.}, Author = {Chemla, Emmanuel}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:22:28 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:23:25 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {299--340}, Title = {Presuppositions of quantified sentences: experimental data}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Aihara:2009, Abstract = {It has long been observed that the superlative construction, exemplified by John climbed the highest mountain, has two readings. On the absolute reading, the heights of the relevant mountains in a relevant context are compared; on the com- parative reading, relevant climbers' achievements of mountain climbing are compared (Szabolcsi, Comparative superlatives, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 1986). Two theories have been proposed regarding this ambiguity. One theory holds that it results from movement of the superlative morpheme -est (movement theory) (Heim, Association with focus, Doctoral Dissertation, 1985, Notes on superlatives, 1999; Szabolcsi 1986). The other theory holds that the ambiguity is derived by assignment of different values to the context variable C, keeping a single LF structure where -est stays in situ (in-situ theory) (Farkas and Kiss, Nat Lang Linguist Theory 18:417--455, 2000; Sharvit and Stateva, Linguist Philos 25:453--504, 2002). As is pointed out by Heim (1999), a choice between these theories is hard to make based solely on English. Through an investigation of Japanese superlative constructions, this paper argues that, in Japanese at least, a movement theory is required.}, Author = {Aihara, Masahiko}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:21:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:21:39 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {341--367}, Title = {The scope of \emph{-est}: evidence from {J}apanese}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Saebo:2009, Abstract = {The meaning of have is notoriously difficult to define; sometimes it seems to denote possession, but often, it seems to denote nothing, only to com- plicate composition. This paper focuses on the cases where have embeds a small clause, proposing that all it accomplishes is abstraction, turning the small clause into a predicate. This analysis is extended to the cases where have appears to embed DPs: These objects are interpreted as small clauses as well, with implicit predicates denoting possession or---with relational nouns---nothing.}, Author = {S{\ae}b{\o}, Kjell Johan}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:19:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:20:15 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {369--397}, Title = {Possession and pertinence: the meaning of \emph{have}}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Wulf:2009, Abstract = {The progressive in English appears to be inherently modal, due to what Dowty (Word meaning and Montague grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics and in Montague's PTQ, 1979) terms the imperfective paradox. In truth-conditional accounts, the literal truth of a clause with the modal progressive hinges on the possibility of the described outcome. The clause's truth under such accounts has also been tacitly assumed to describe its felicitous use. Two challenges for this strategy are discussed. First, a progressive clause exhibiting the imperfective paradox can occur felicitously even when the described outcome is not possible. Second, a progressive clause exhibiting the paradox can occur felicitously with an accompanying unless-clause, yet the analysis of unless-clauses directly contradicts the modal analysis of the truth-conditional behavior of the progressive clause in such cases. If the analysis of unless is not flawed, then the modal pro- gressive will require reanalysis.}, Author = {Wulf, Douglas J.}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:18:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:18:35 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {205--218}, Title = {Two new challenges for the modal account of the progressive}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Reich:2009, Abstract = {In this paper, I argue on empirical grounds that (VL-initial) Asymmetric Coordination in German cannot be reduced to a syntactic structure of the form [if S1, then S2], but rather needs to be analyzed as some kind of adjunction to the if-clause, i.e., along the lines of [[if S1] and S2]. This conclusion gives rise to an apparent mismatch between syntactic structure (narrow scope of if) and semantic interpretation (wide scope of if). To resolve this paradoxical situation, I propose a compositional semantics for conditionals that is based on the idea that (indexed) if is to be construed as some kind of anaphor (variable) that ranges over objects of type modal base picking up a modal background in the actual context. Even though this analysis assigns a non-vacuous semantics to the complementizer if, it is still com- patible with the syntax of Asymmetric Coordination in German, and, in contrast to alternative accounts, avoids the generation of non-existent distributive readings.}, Author = {Reich, Ingo}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:16:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:16:48 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {219--244}, Title = {What Asymmetric Coordination in {G}erman tells us about the syntax and semantics of conditionals}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Magri:2009, Abstract = {Predicates such as tall or to know Latin, which intuitively denote permanent properties, are called individual-level predicates. Many peculiar prop- erties of this class of predicates have been noted in the literature. One such property is that we cannot say #John is sometimes tall. Here is a way to account for this property: this sentence sounds odd because it triggers the scalar implicature that the alternative John is always tall is false, which cannot be, given that, if John is sometimes tall, then he always is. This intuition faces two challenges. First: this scalar implicature has a weird nature, since it must be surprisingly robust (other- wise, it could be cancelled and the sentence rescued) and furthermore blind to the common knowledge that tallness is a permanent property (since this piece of common knowledge makes the two alternatives equivalent). Second: it is not clear how this intuition could be extended to other, more complicated properties of individual-level predicates. The goal of this paper is to defend the idea of an implicature-based theory of individual-level predicates by facing these two chal- lenges. In the first part of the paper, I try to make sense of the weird nature of these special mismatching implicatures within the recent grammatical framework for scalar implicatures of Chierchia (Structures and beyond, 2004) and Fox (2007). In the second part of the paper, I show how this implicature-based line of reasoning can be extended to more complicated properties of individual-level predicates, such as restrictions on the interpretation of their bare plural subjects, noted in Carlson (Reference to kinds in English. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 1977), Milsark (Linguistic Analysis 3.1: 1--29, 1977), and Fox (Natural Language Semantics 3: 283--341, 1995); restrictions on German word order, noted in Diesing (Indefinites, 1992); and restrictions on Q-adverbs, noted in Kratzer (The Generic Book, ed. Carlson and Pelletier, 125--175, 1995).}, Author = {Magri, Giorgio}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:14:22 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:15:23 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {245--297}, Title = {A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Zucchi:2009, Abstract = {In Italian Sign Language (LIS), when past or future time adverbs are present, the signs for verbs exhibit the same manual configurations whether the sentence reports a past event or a future event. Facts of this kind, also observed for American Sign Language (ASL) and other sign languages, have led some authors (Friedman, among others) to conclude that these languages, on a par with spoken languages like Chinese, lack grammatical tense. Neidle et al. and Jacobowitz and Stokoe have challenged this view for ASL and have argued that ASL sentences contain tense markers. I present some data showing that LIS verbs inflect for tense. I argue, moreover, that the apparent lack of tense inflection when LIS past and future time adverbs are present is due to the fact that these adverbs shift the s-point and that LIS past and future tenses are absolute tenses. I provide a formal account of the LIS tense system based on these assumptions. The account is implemented in Heim's analysis of tense.}, Author = {Zucchi, Sandro}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:13:01 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:13:27 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {99--139}, Title = {Along the time line}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Yatsushiro:2009, Abstract = {The existential and universal quantifiers in Japanese both consist of two morphemes: an indeterminate pronoun and a quantificational suffix. This paper examines the distributional characteristics of these suffixes (ka for the existential quantifier and mo for the universal quantifier). It is shown that ka can appear in a wider range of structural positions than mo can. This difference receives explana- tion on semantic grounds. I propose that mo is a generalized quantifier. More specifically, I assume that the phrase headed by mo is of type hha; ti; ti. Because of its type, mo cannot appear in certain structural positions without causing type mismatch. Ka, on the other hand, is a choice function variable of type ha=t; ai, and due to its type, its distribution is not as restricted. One of the consequences of this analysis is that there are no quantifier raising or type shifting operations in Japanese that would adequately obviate type mismatch.}, Author = {Yatsushiro, Kazuko}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:11:34 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:12:45 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {141--173}, Title = {The distribution of quantificational suffixes in {J}apanese}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Morzycki:2009, Abstract = {Degree readings of size adjectives, as in big stamp-collector, cannot be explained away as merely the consequence of some extragrammatical phenomenon. Rather, this paper proposes that they actually reflect the grammatical architecture of nominal gradability. Such readings are available only for size adjectives in attrib- utive positions, and systematically only for adjectives that predicate bigness. These restrictions can be understood as part of a broader picture of gradable NPs in which adnominal degree morphemes---often overt---play a key role, analogous to their role in the extended AP. Size adjectives acquire degree readings through a degree morpheme similar to the one that licenses AP-modifying measure phrases. Its syntax gives rise to positional restrictions on the availability of these readings, and the semantics of degree measurement interacts with the scale structure of size adjectives to give rise to restrictions on the adjective itself.}, Author = {Morzycki, Marcin}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:09:58 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:10:47 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {175--203}, Title = {Degree modification of gradable nouns: size adjectives and adnominal degree morphemes}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Lin:2009a, Abstract = {This paper argues that superiority comparatives in Mandarin Chinese are all phrasal comparatives that can be directly interpreted, and makes a new suggestion of taking the ba-phrase (`compare-phrase') to be an adjunct and one constituent, but with ba-shells. This syntactic analysis allows one to combine into one phrase various compared constituents that would otherwise not be analyzed as forming a phrase by themselves. Semantically, in extension of work by Heim as well as Bhatt and Takahashi, ba is taken to compare two sequences of arguments of a gradable predicate along the dimension given by that predicate. It is also suggested that comparatives across languages may be subject to three parameters: (i) argument-dependent comparison vs. non-argument dependent comparison, (ii) phrasal comparison vs. clausal comparison, and (iii) monoadic comparison vs. dyadic comparison.}, Author = {Lin, Jo-Wang}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:08:09 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:08:59 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--27}, Title = {Chinese comparatives and their implicational parameters}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hallman:2009, Abstract = {Proportional quantification and progressive aspect interact in English in revealing ways. This paper investigates these interactions and draws conclusions about the semantics of the progressive and telicity. In the scope of the progressive, the proportion named by a proportionality quantifier (e.g. most in The software was detecting most errors) must hold in every subevent of the event so described, indicating that a predicate in the scope of the progressive is interpreted as an internally homogeneous activity. Such an activity interpretation is argued to be available for telic predicates (e.g. cross the street) because these receive a partitive interpretation except in combination with a completive operator, which asserts that the event so described has culminated. The obligatoriness of the completive operator in the preterit is shown to parametrically distinguish those languages that show completion entailments in the preterit, e.g. English, from those that do not, e.g. Malagasy, Hindi, and Japanese.}, Author = {Hallman, Peter}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:06:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:07:34 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {29--61}, Title = {Proportions in time: interactions of quantification and aspect}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hackl:2009, Abstract = {Proportional quantifiers have played a central role in the development of formal semantics because they set a benchmark for the expressive power needed to describe quantification in natural language (Barwise and Cooper Linguist Philos 4:159--219, 1981). The proportional quantifier most, in particular, supplied the initial motivation for adopting Generalized Quantifier Theory (GQT) because its meaning is definable as a relation between sets of individuals, which are taken to be semantic primitives in GQT. This paper proposes an alternative analysis of most that does not treat it as a lexical item whose meaning is accessible without the help of compositional processes. Instead, proportional most is analyzed as the superlative of many (cf. Bresnan Linguist Inq 4(3):274--344, 1973). Two types of empirical evidence are presented in support of this view, both exploiting the fact that only a decompositional analysis of proportional quantifiers provides the means to generate different logical forms for seemingly equivalent statements of the form most A B and more than half of the A B.}, Author = {Hackl, Martin}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:05:06 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:06:10 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {63--98}, Title = {On the grammar and processing of proportional quantifiers: \emph{most} versus \emph{more than half}}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2009}} @article{Nouwen:2008, Abstract = {The paper concerns the expression of non-strict comparison, focusing in particular on constructions of the form [no(t) . . .-er than] in modified numerals. The main empirical finding is the observation that negated comparatives contrast with regular comparatives in that the former but not the latter can give rise to (scalar) implicatures. It is shown that such a contrast falls out of theories of exhaustive interpretation that claim alternatives to form dense scales. An important result is that the paper sharpens the desiderata for theories of exhaustification.}, Author = {Nouwen, Rick}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:03:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:04:16 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {271--295}, Title = {Upper-bound \emph{no more}: the exhaustive interpretation of non-strict comparison}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Van-Rooij:2008, Abstract = {In this paper, Universal any and Negative Polarity Item any are uniformly analyzed as `counterfactual' donkey sentences (in disguise). Their difference in meaning is reduced here to the distinction between strong and weak readings of donkey sentences. It is shown that this explains the universal and existential character of Universal- and NPI-any, respectively, and the positive and negative contexts in which they are licensed. Our uniform analysis extends to the use of any in command and permission sentences. It predicts that whereas the use of any in permission sentences is licensed and gives rise to a universal reading, it is not licensed in command sentences.}, Author = {Van Rooij, Robert}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 12:02:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:02:40 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {297--315}, Title = {Towards a uniform analysis of \emph{any}}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Rullmann:2008, Abstract = {Modals in Statimcets (Lillooet Salish) show two differences from their counterparts in English. First, they have variable quantificational force, systematically allowing both possibility and necessity interpretations; and second, they lexically restrict the conversational background, distinguishing for example between deontic and (several kinds of) epistemic modality. We provide an analysis of the Statimcets modals according to which they are akin to specific indefinites in the nominal domain. They introduce choice function variables which select a subset of the accessible worlds. Following Klinedinst, we assume distributivity over the resulting set of worlds. Statimcets modals thus receive a uniform interpretation as (distributive) pluralities. The appearance of variability in modal force arises because the choice function can select a larger or smaller subset of accessible worlds. Finally, we discuss the implications of our analysis for the investigation of modal systems in other languages.}, Author = {Rullmann, Hotze and Matthewson, Lisa and Davis, Henry}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:59:50 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 12:01:04 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {317--357}, Title = {Modals as distributive indefinites}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kroll:2008, Abstract = {The problem of indistinguishable participants is a well-known problem for D-type theories of donkey pronouns. Recently, Paul Elbourne has offered a D-type theory that purports to dissolve the problem of indistinguishable participants. I argue against Elbourne's solution.}, Author = {Kroll, Nicky}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:58:27 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:59:02 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {359--372}, Title = {On bishops and donkeys}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Gualmini:2008, Abstract = {This paper focuses on children's interpretation of sentences containing negation and a quantifier (e.g., The detective didn't find some guys). Recent studies suggest that, although children are capable of accessing inverse scope interpretations of such sentences, they resort to surface scope to a larger extent than adults. To account for children's behavioral pattern, we propose a new factor at play in Truth Value Judgment tasks: the Question--Answer Requirement (QAR). According to the QAR, children (and adults) must interpret the target sentence that they evaluate as an answer to a question that is made salient by the discourse.}, Author = {Gualmini, Andrea and Hulsey, Sarah and Hacquard, Valentine and Fox, Danny}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:56:23 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:57:25 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {205--237}, Title = {The Question-Answer Requirement for scope assignment}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Moltmann:2008, Abstract = {The complement of transitive intensional verbs, like any nonreferential complement, can be replaced by a `special quantifier' or `special pronoun' such as something, the same thing, or what. In previous work on predicative complements and that-clauses I argued that special quantifiers and pronouns introduce entities that would not have occurred in the semantic structure of the sentence without the special quantifier, entities that one would refer to with the corresponding nominalization. Thus something in John thinks something or the same thing in John thinks the same thing as Mary ranges not over propositions, but rather over entities of the sort `John's thought that S' or `the thought that S', without those entities acting as arguments of the think-relation. Despite initial apparent lack of evidence for this view for transitive verbs like need, a closer inspection of a greater range of data gives in fact further support for the `Nominalization Theory' of special quantifiers, once `nominalization' is viewed in a suitably extended and flexible way.}, Author = {Moltmann, Friederike}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:55:01 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:55:37 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {239--270}, Title = {Intensional verbs and their intentional objects}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Beck:2008, Author = {Beck, Sigrid and Crnic, Luka and G{\"o}tz, Thilo}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:53:23 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:54:05 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {111--114}, Title = {Ruin and restitution}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Alonso-Ovalle:2008, Abstract = {The exclusive component of unembedded disjunctions is standardly derived as a conversational implicature by assuming that or forms a lexical scale with and. It is well known, however, that this assumption does not suffice to determine the required scalar competitors of disjunctions with more than two atomic disjuncts (McCawley, Everything that linguists have always wanted to know about logic* (But were ashamed to ask). Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1993, p. 324; Simons, ``Or'': Issues in the semantics and pragmatics of disjunction. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1998). To solve this, Sauerland (Linguist Philos 27(3): 367--391, 2004) assumes that or forms a lexical scale with two otherwise unattested silent connectives (L and R) that retrieve the left and right terms of a disjunction. A number of recent works have pro- posed an Alternative Semantics for indefinites and disjunction to account for their interaction with modals and other propositional operators (Kratzer and Shimoyama, In: Otsu Y (ed) The Proceedings of the Third Tokyo Confer- ence on Psycholinguistics. Hituzi Syobo, Tokyo, pp. 1--25, 2002; Aloni, In: Weisgerber M (ed) Proceedings of the Conference ``SuB7---Sinn und Bedeutung''. Arbeitspapier Nr. 114. Konstanz, pp. 28--37, 2003; Simons, Nat Lang Seman- tics 13: 271--316, 2005; Alonso-Ovalle, Disjunction in alternative semantics. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 2006). We note that the McCawley--Simons problem does not arise in an Alternative Semantics, if we assume that the set of pragmatic competitors to a disjunction is the closure under intersection of the set of propositions that it denotes. An adaptation of the strengthening mechanism presented in Fox (In: Sauerland U, Stateva P (eds) Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics. MacMillan, Palgrave, pp. 71--120, 2007) allows for the derivation of the exclusive compo- nent of disjunctions with more than two atomic disjuncts without having to rely on the L and R operators. The proposal extends to the case of disjunctions with logically dependent disjuncts.}, Author = {Alonso-Ovalle, Luis}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:51:47 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:52:37 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {115--128}, Title = {Innocent exclusion in an {A}lternative {S}emantics}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kissine:2008, Abstract = {In opposition to a common assumption, this paper defends the idea that the auxiliary verb will has no other semantic contribution in contemporary English than a temporal shift towards the future with respect to the utterance time. Strong reasons for rejecting the idea that will quantifies over possible worlds are presented. Given the adoption of Lewis's and Kratzer's views on modality, the alleged `modal' uses of will are accounted for by a pragmatic mechanism which restricts the domain of the covert epistemic necessity operator scoping over the sentence.}, Author = {Kissine, Mikhail}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:50:23 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:50:59 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {129--155}, Title = {Why \emph{will} is not a modal}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Prete:2008, Abstract = {In this paper, I argue that the temporal connective prima (`before') is a comparative adverb. The argument is based on a number of grammatical facts from Italian, showing that there is an asymmetry between prima and dopo (`after'). On the ground of their divergent behaviour, I suggest that dopo has a different grammatical status from prima. I propose a semantic treatment for prima that is based on an independently motivated analysis of comparatives which can be traced back to Seuren (in: Kiefer and Ruwet (eds.) Generative grammar in Europe, 1973). Dopo is analyzed instead as an atomic two-place predicate which contributes a binary relation over events to the sentence meaning. The different semantic treatments of the two connectives provide an explanation for the grammatical asymmetries considered at the outset; interestingly, they also shed some light on other asymmetries between prima and dopo, which are known to hold for the English temporal connectives before and after as well: these asymmetries are related to the veridicality properties, the distribution of NPIs, and the logical properties of these connectives first de- scribed in Anscombe (Philos Rev 73:3--24, 1964).}, Author = {Prete, Fabio Del}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:48:44 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:49:38 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {157--203}, Title = {A non-uniform semantic analysis of the {I}talian temporal connectives \emph{prima} and \emph{dopo}}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Marti:2008, Abstract = {In this paper I provide a decompositional analysis of three kinds of plural indefinites in two related languages, European Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. The three indefinites studied are bare plurals, the unos (Spanish)/ uns (Portuguese) type, and the algunos (Spanish)/alguns (Portuguese) type. The paper concentrates on four properties: semantic plurality, positive polarity, partitivity, and event distribution. The logic underlying the analysis is that of compositionality, applied at the subword level: as items become bigger in form (with the addition of morphemes), they also acquire more semantic properties. The paper proposes the ``indefinite hierarchy'', which establishes a set of components for languages to build their indefinites with, in a particular order.}, Author = {Mart{\'\i}, Luisa}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:46:44 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:47:41 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--37}, Title = {The semantics of plural indefinite noun phrases in {S}panish and {P}ortuguese}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Wilhelm:2008, Abstract = {This paper documents the number-related properties of Dene Suine (Athapaskan). Dene Suline has neither number inflection nor numeral classifiers. Nouns are bare, occur as such in argument positions, and combine directly with numerals. With these traits, Dene Suline represents a type of language that is little considered in formal typologies of number and countability. The paper critiques one influential proposal, that of Chierchia (in: Rothstein (ed.) Events and grammar, 1998a; Natural Language Semantics 6: 339--405, 1998b), and presents an alternative number typology, which introduces variation in the semantics of numerals. It will be shown that bare nouns in Dene Suline can be mass or count. Hence, the difference between count and mass cannot be expressed in terms of number, as in Chierchia. Instead, I express it in terms of atomicity. Mass nouns have nonatomic denotations, bare count nouns have atomic denotations that comprise singularities and pluralities. I also propose that numerals contain a function that accesses the singularities in a noun's denotation. Hence they are compatible with bare count nouns, but not with mass nouns. In classifier languages, numerals denote a cardinality only; singularity-accessing functions are expressed in separate elements: the classifiers. Thus, languages like Chinese require classifiers because the numerals are semantically deficient, and not, as is assumed by Chierchia and others, the bare nouns.}, Author = {Wilhelm, Andrea}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:31:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:46:30 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39--68}, Title = {Bare nouns and number in D{\"e}ne S\c{u}{\l}in\'e}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Gajewski:2008a, Abstract = {This paper addresses two puzzles in the semantics of connected exceptive phrases (EP): (i) the compatibility of EPs modifying noun phrases headed by the negative polarity item (NPI) determiner any and (ii) the ability of a negative universal quantifier modified by an EP to license strong NPIs. Previous analyses of EPs are shown to fail to solve these puzzles. A new unified solution to the two puzzles is proposed. The crucial insight of the analysis is to allow von Fintel's (Natural Language Semantics 1: 123--148, 1993; Restrictions on quantifier domains, PhD dissertation, 1994) leastness condition on EPs to be imposed at scopes non-local to the surface position of the EP. A general result is derived concerning the truth conditions of sentences in which an existential modified by an EP occurs in the scope of a downward entailing operator. The distribution of EPs is argued to depend on how the leastness condition interacts with other pragmatic strengthening conditions, such as the one imposed on any by Kadmon and Landman (Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 353--422, 1993).}, Author = {Gajewski, Jon}, Date-Added = {2010-01-01 11:29:29 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-01 11:30:32 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {69--110}, Title = {{NPI} \emph{any} and connected exceptive phrases}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kim:2007a, Abstract = {This paper aims to clarify and resolve issues surrounding the so-called formal linking problem in interpreting the Internally Headed Relative Clause construction in Korean and Japanese, a problem that has been identified in recent E-type pronominal treatments of the construction (e.g., Hoshi, K. (1995). Structural and interpretive aspects of head-internal and head-external relative clauses. PhD dissertation, University of Rochester; Shimoyama, J. (2001). Wh-constructions in Japanese. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst). In the literature, this problem refers to the difficulty of capturing the delimited semantic variability of the E-type pronoun present in the embedding clause of the construction. I show that the E-type pronoun at issue is subject to a different licensing condition from a typical E-type pronoun and therefore presents a different linking problem. More specifically, it requires that the embedded clause describe a state of its antecedent and its descriptive content be supplied by a salient property rep- resented in the logical form of the embedded clause. I propose an event-based semantic analysis that derives the effects of this novel generalization by establishing a binding relation between the event structure of the embedded clause and the denotation of the E-type pronoun.}, Author = {Kim, Min-Joo}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:24:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:25:50 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {279--315}, Title = {Formal linking in {I}nternally {H}eaded {R}elatives}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{An:2007a, Abstract = {In this paper, I offer a novel solution to the well-known problem concerning two polarity items in Korean, amu-(N)-to and amu-(N)-rato, that show a complementary distribution within the set of typical NPI-licensing contexts. I present a uniform analysis of the distribution of these NPIs, where the complementary distribution follows from the opposite scope properties of the emphatic particles to and rato contained in the NPIs in question. As theoretical background, I adopt Karttunen and Peters's (1979, Syntax and Semantics 11: Presuppositions (pp. 1--56). New York: Academic Press) and Wilkinson's (1996, Natural Language Semantics, 4, 193--215) scope analysis of even, Lahiri's (1998, Natural Language Semantics, 6, 57--127) analysis of Hindi NPIs, and Guerzoni's (2002, Proceedings of NELS 32 (pp. 153--170); GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass.; 2004, Natural Language Semantics, 12, 319--343) analysis of the negative bias of yes/no-questions containing minimizers. The current analysis also lends further support to Guerzoni's approach in that it bears out the prediction that in certain environments, a yes/no-question can be positively biased, i.e., only the positive answer is allowed as a legitimate answer in the context; this prediction was left unconfirmed in Guerzoni's work.}, Author = {An, Duk-Ho}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:23:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:24:13 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {317--350}, Title = {On the distribution of {NPI}s in {K}orean}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Portner:2007, Abstract = {Imperatives may be interpreted with many subvarieties of directive force, for example as orders, invitations, or pieces of advice. I argue that the range of meanings that imperatives can convey should be identified with the variety of interpretations that are possible for non-dynamic root modals (what I call `priority modals'), including deontic, bouletic, and teleological readings. This paper presents an analysis of the relationship between imperatives and priority modals in discourse which asserts that, just as declaratives contribute to the Common Ground and thus provide information relevant to the interpretation of epistemic modals in subsequent discourse, imperatives contribute to another component of the discourse context, the addressee's To-Do List, which serves as a contextual resource for the interpretation of priority modals. This analysis predicts that the interpretation of imperatives and modals in discourse is constrained in surprising ways; these predictions are borne out.}, Author = {Portner, Paul}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:22:12 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:22:45 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {351--383}, Title = {Imperatives and modals}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Chung:2007, Abstract = {This paper focuses on the Korean suffix -te, which has been variously analyzed as a marker of tense, aspect, tense--aspect, mood, mood--tense, or evidentiality. I argue against all of these approaches and propose instead that -te is a spatial deictic past tense, which triggers an evidential environment. It refers to a certain past time when the speaker either observed an event or some evidence of the event within his (her) perceptual field. Thus, the denotation of -te is `overlap', not between the speaker's perceptual field and the event itself, but between the speaker's perceptual field and the evidence of the event at the past reference time. To account for this denotation, I propose an `evidence trace' function as well as a `speaker's perceptual trace' function (cf. M. Faller, J Semantics 21:45--85, 2004). My analysis shows that suffixes like -ess (which is traditionally analyzed as a perfect) play two roles, as an indirect evidential and a perfect, depending on whether they appear with the spatial deictic tense -te or with a simple deictic tense. I argue that in Korean two distinct tense systems---the regular tense--aspect system and the spatial deictic tense--evidential system---exist in parallel. Thus the proposed analysis allows evidentials to be subsumed under the formal theory of tense, aspect, and mood.}, Author = {Chung, Kyung-Sook}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:20:38 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:21:17 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {187--219}, Title = {Spatial deictic tense and evidentials in {K}orean}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Arregui:2007, Abstract = {Differences in the interpretation of would-conditionals with simple (perfective) and perfect antecedent clauses are marked enough to discourage a unified view. However, this paper presents a unified, Lewis--Stalnaker style semantics for the modal in such constructions. Differences in the interpretation of the conditionals are derived from the interaction between the interpretation of different types of aspect and the modal. The paper makes a distinction between perfective and perfect aspect in terms of whether they make reference to or quantify over Lewis-style events. In making reference to Lewis-events, perfective aspect is shown to be incompatible with counterfactual would- conditionals. The so-called `epistemic flavor' of perfective conditionals about the future is derived from the use of diagonalization as an interpretive strategy called upon to resolve reference.}, Author = {Arregui, Ana}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:19:09 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:19:50 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {21--264}, Title = {When aspect matters: the case of \emph{would}-conditionals}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Altshuler:2007, Abstract = {This squib presents a rebuttal to two of King's (Complex demonstratives: A quantificational account. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2001) arguments that complex demonstratives are quantifier phrases like every man. The first is in response to King's argument that because complex demonstratives induce weak crossover effects, they are quantifier phrases. I argue that unlike quantifier phrases and like other definite determiner phrases, complex demonstratives in object position can corefer with singular pronouns contained in the subject DP. Although complex demonstratives could undergo LF-movement, the ruling out by weak crossover is empirically undetectable. The second rebuttal is in response to King's argument that because complex demonstratives allow antecedent-contained deletion, they are quantifier phrases. I present data showing that along with quantifier phrases, complex demonstratives pattern with proper names in allowing ACD with restrictive modification, but usually not with non-restrictive modification.}, Author = {Altshuler, Daniel}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:17:28 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:18:18 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {265--277}, Title = {{WCO}, {ACD} and what they reveal about complex demonstratives}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Kobuchi-Philip:2007, Abstract = {This paper discusses Japanese numeral quantifiers that are used to count individuals, rather than quantities of a substance, and which may occur either as floated or non-floated quantifiers. It is argued that such morphologically complex numeral quantifiers (NQs) are semantically complex as well: The numeral within the NQ is the quantifier itself, the classifier its domain of quantification. The proposed analysis offers a unified semantic account of floated and non-floated NQs that adheres closely to their surface morphology and syntax. It explains why floated NQs generally force a distributive reading. It covers both classifiers construed with objects and classifiers construed with events. In addition, it captures the fact that the classifier must agree with the NP it is construed with.}, Author = {Kobuchi-Philip, Mana}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:09:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:10:21 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {95--130}, Title = {Individual-denoting classifiers}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Russell:2007, Abstract = {This paper provides evidence for an ambiguity of bare VPs in the English conditional conjunction construction. This ambiguity, undetected by previous researchers, provides a key to the development of a compositional semantic analysis of conditional conjunction with imperative first conjuncts. The analysis combines existing semantic theories of imperatives, the future tense, modal subordination, and speech act conjunction to yield the correct semantics without further stipulation.}, Author = {Russell, Benjamin}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:08:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:09:05 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {131--166}, Title = {Imperatives in conditional conjunction}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Muhlbauer:2007, Abstract = {I argue for three basic classes of nominals, based on the (non)- relation they encode; (i) alienable nouns, which have no inherent relation, but gain an underspecified `R' relation when possessed (Higginbotham, Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 305--420, 1983); (ii) relational nouns, which have an inherent relation, defined as an `R' relation restricted by the lexical meaning of the head noun (Barker, Possessive descriptions. CSLI, Stanford, Ca., 1995; Burton, Six issues to consider when choosing a husband. PhD Dissertation, Rutgers University, 1995); and (iii) inalienable nouns, which also have an inherent relation, defined as a material part- whole relation (Link, Algebraic semantics for linguistics and philosophy. CSLI, Stanford, Ca., 1995). I then consider evidence from the Algonquian language Plains Cree, which overtly distinguishes all three subclasses of nominals.}, Author = {M{\"u}hlbauer, Jeff}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 11:06:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 11:07:34 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {167--186}, Title = {Evidence for three distinct nominal classes in {P}lains {C}ree}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Ippolito:2007, Abstract = {In this paper, I argue that the aspectual, marginality, and conces- sive uses of the grading particles still and already can be reduced to the following three classes of focus-sensitive grading particles: additive particles like too, scalar particles like even, and exclusive particles like only. The meaning differences among the occurrences of still (and already) are mostly reduced to the differences among these three classes of grading particles. In turn, these differences are shown to correlate with what type of object is denoted by the phrase in the scope of the particle. The proposal has repercussions also for the focus-sensitive particle again. I investigate the latter too, and I propose a parallel between the temporal and nominal domains where the contrast between still and again is analyzed along the lines of the contrast between definite and indefinite noun phrases.}, Author = {Ippolito, Michela}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:58:26 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:59:15 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--34}, Title = {On the meaning of some focus-sensitive particles}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{McCready:2007, Abstract = {Japanese has a large number of evidential and modal expressions. Many of the inferential evidentials -- mitai, yoo, rashii -- also have an adjectival use. On this use, they make a claim about the prototypicality of some object or individual with respect to another class of object, in the case of rashii, or about the similarity of these two objects, for yoo and mitai. This paper provides a compositional semantics for these adjectives, claiming that they are evaluated in terms of the degree to which they instantiate a set of properties (conventionally) associated with a class of object.}, Author = {McCready, Eric and Ogata, Norry}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:57:01 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:57:51 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {35--63}, Title = {Adjectives, stereotypicality, and comparison}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Aloni:2007, Abstract = {The article proposes an analysis of imperatives and possibility and necessity statements that (i) explains their differences with respect to the licensing of free choice any and (ii) accounts for the related phenomena of free choice disjunction in imperatives, permissions, and other possibility statements. Any and or are analyzed as operators introducing sets of alternative propositions. Free choice licensing operators are treated as quantifiers over these sets. In this way their interpretation can be sensitive to the alter- natives any and or introduce in their scope.}, Author = {Aloni, Maria}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:55:39 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:56:26 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {65--94}, Title = {Free choice, modals, and imperatives}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2007}} @article{Zweig:2006, Abstract = {This paper revisits the question of whether propositions in situation semantics must be persistent [Kratzer (1989). Linguistics and Philosophy, 12, 607--653]. It shows that ignoring persistence causes empirical problems for theories which use quantification over minimal situations as a solution for donkey anaphora [Elbourne (2005). Situations and individuals. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press]. At the same time, modifying these theories to incorporate persistence makes them incompatible with the use of situations for contextual restriction [Kratzer (2004). Ms., University of Massachusetts].}, Author = {Zweig, Eytan}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:46:11 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:46:55 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {283--296}, Title = {When the donkey lost its fleas: persistence, minimal situations, and embedded quantifiers}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2006}} @article{Wagner:2006, Abstract = {`Only' associates with focus and licenses NPIs. This paper looks at the distributional pattern of NPIs under `only' and presents evidence for the movement theory of focus association and against an in situ approach. NPIs are licensed in the `scope' (or the second argument) of `only', but not in the complement (or its first argument), which I will call the `syntactic restrictor'. While earlier approaches argued that `only' licenses NPIs in the unfocused part of the sentence it occurs in except in its focus, evidence from DP-`only' shows that NPIs are also not licensed in the unfocused part of the syntactic restrictor. The distribution of NPIs provides a test for the size of the syntactic restrictor, and this test is applied to the case of VP-`only'. The evidence shows that (i) the restrictor can be smaller than the entire VP and is not necessarily identical to the surface complement of `only'; (ii) in the case of association with a head the restrictor comprises an XP containing the head; and (iii) in cases of association into an island, the restrictor comprises the entire island. Generalizations (i)--(iii) can be captured straightforwardly by a movement approach but are incompatible with an in situ analysis. Contextual domain restriction of the kind used in in situ approaches accounts for the appropriate semantics in cases where the semantic focus is properly contained in the syntactic restrictor of `only'.}, Author = {Wagner, Michael}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:44:09 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:45:23 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {297--324}, Title = {Association by movement: evidence from {NPI}-licensing}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2006}} @article{Chung:2006, Abstract = {In earlier work, we developed an approach to clause-internal composition in which predicates can be composed with arguments by operations other than Function Application, and it makes a difference which composition operation is employed. Here we take our approach further by examining two nonsaturating operations that combine property contents: Restrict, which composes a predicate with the property content of an indefinite; and Modify, which is involved in predicate modification. Nonsaturating operations that combine property contents are often formalized in terms of predicate intersection, which is commutative. Using evidence from the Austronesian language Chamorro, we argue that Restrict and Modify are not `commutative', but instead incorporate an asymmetry: they take one content to supply a domain that is narrowed further by combination with the other content. Syntactically, it is transparent which category's content supplies the domain. But semantically, this information can be recovered only from the way in which the composition operation affects the contents that it composes, since---as we show---the same contents can be composed with distinct results.}, Author = {Chung, Sandra and Ladusaw, William A.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:40:21 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:41:14 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {325--357}, Title = {Chamorro evidence for compositional asymmetry}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2006}} @article{Guerzoni:2006, Abstract = {In this paper, I explore the possibility of understanding locality restrictions on the distribution of Negative Polarity Items (NPIs) as a consequence of covert movement. The present proposal restates Linebarger's Immediate Scope Constraint in terms of morphology-driven checking requirements. These requirements cannot be met if a blocking element intervenes between the NPI feature and its morphosemantic licenser at Logical Form (LF). The empirical generalization is that the class of NPI `blocking expressions' (a.k.a. `interveners') overlaps to a large extent with interveners identified in wh-questions. Therefore, the same grammatical checking mechanisms operating in that domain, rather than the presence of an implicature, are here shown to be responsible both for apparent violations to Linebarger's constraint (contra Linebarger) and for intervention effects (contra Krifka, 1995, and Chierchia, 2004). This approach is argued to be superior on empirical grounds as it predicts facts that are left unaccounted for in a theory like Linebarger's, where pragmatics rescues otherwise ill-formed structures. In addition, the proposal allows us to view the locality constraints operating in the domain of NPI-licensing as an instance of more general (though yet to be fully understood) principles of the grammar whose effects are attested in other domains, such as wh-questions in German, Discourse- linked (D-linked) wh-questions in English, and Negative Concord (NC) configurations (e.g. in Italian and French).}, Author = {Guerzoni, Elena}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:38:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:39:25 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {359--398}, Title = {Intervention effects on {NPI}s and feature movement: towards a unified account of intervention}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2006}} @article{Werner:2006, Abstract = {In this paper, I argue for two principles to determine the temporal interpretation of modal sentences in English, given a theory in which modals are interpreted against double conversational backgrounds and an ontology in which possible worlds branch towards the future. The Disparity Principle requires that a modal sentence makes distinctions between worlds in the modal base. The Non- Disparity Principle requires that a modal sentence does not make distinctions on the basis of facts settled at speech time. Selection of the modal base will set these principles against each other, or allow for their cooperative interaction. For a root modal base, there is a conflict and disparity wins. The resulting interpretation is future. For a non-root modal base, the principles cooperate. Non-disparity determines a non-future interpretation and disparity requires the sentence to go beyond what is known by the speaker.}, Author = {Werner, Tom}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:35:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:36:50 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {235--255}, Title = {Future and non-future modal sentences}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2006}} @article{Moltmann:2006, Abstract = {The generic pronoun one (or its empty counterpart, arbitrary PRO) exhibits a range of properties that show a special connection to the first person, or rather the relevant intentional agent (speaker, addressee, or described agent). Generic one typically leads to generic sentences whose generalization is obtained from a first-person experience or action or else is meant to be immediately applicable to the relevant agent himself (in particular the addressee). I will argue that generic one involves generic quantification in which the predicate is applied to a given entity `as if' to the relevant agent himself. This is best understood in terms of simulation, a central notion in some recent developments in the philosophy of mind and cognitive science (Simulation Theory): Generic one involves `generic simulation', roughly `putting oneself into the shoes of anyone meeting relevant conditions'. Formally, this means that generic one introduces a complex variable, consisting of an ordinary variable and a `mode of presentation' of the relevant intentional agent, namely the property of being identical to that agent. Generic one, like other pronouns acting as bound variables, may also introduce just an ordinary variable. In both cases, the ordinary variable needs to be bound by a sentential generic operator.}, Author = {Moltmann, Friederike}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:33:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:37:59 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {257--281}, Title = {Generic \emph{one}, arbitrary {PRO} and the first person}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2006}} @article{Silverman:1996, Author = {Silverman, Daniel}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:23:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:24:54 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {301--322}, Title = {Phonology at the Interface of Phonetics and Morphology: Root-Final Laryngeals in {C}hong, {K}orean, and {S}anskrit}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Martin:1996, Author = {Martin, Samuel E.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:21:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:22:37 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {295--299}, Title = {On the Finite Forms of {O}ld {J}apanese Verbs}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Ito:1996, Author = {Ito, Junko and Kitagawa, Yoshihisa and Mester, Armin}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:20:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:21:18 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {217--294}, Title = {Prosodic Faithfulness and Correspondence: Evidence from a {J}apanese Argot}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Kim:1996a, Author = {Kim, Deok-Bong and Choi, Key-Sun and Lee, Kang-Hyuk}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:18:08 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:19:12 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {183--215}, Title = {A Computational Model of {K}orean Morphological Analysis: A Prediction-Based Approach}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Yeh:1996, Author = {Yeh, Meng}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:15:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:17:55 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {151--182}, Title = {An Analysis of the Experiential \emph{Guo}$_{EXP}$ in {M}andarin: A Temporal Quantifier}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Matsumoto:1996a, Author = {Matsumoto, Yo}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:14:29 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:15:24 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {107--149}, Title = {A Syntactic Account of Light Verb Phenomena in {J}apanese}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Lapointe:1996, Author = {Lapointe, Stephen G.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 10:12:46 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:13:44 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {73--100}, Title = {Comments on {C}ho and {S}ells, ``A Lexical Account of Inflectional Suffixes in {K}orean''}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Sproat:1996, Author = {Sproat, Richard and Chilin, Shih}, Date-Added = {2009-12-31 09:50:09 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:12:05 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {49--71}, Title = {Corpus-Based Analysis of {M}andarin Nominal Root Compound}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Takahashi:1994b, Author = {Takahashi, Daiko}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:17:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:18:12 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {265--300}, Title = {Sluicing in {J}apanese}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1994}} @article{Ernst:1994a, Author = {Ernst, Thomas}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:16:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:17:06 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {241--264}, Title = {Conditions on {C}hinese {A}-{Not}-{A} Questions}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1994}} @article{Saito:1994, Author = {Saito, Mamoru}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:09:21 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:15:43 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {195--240}, Title = {Additional-WH Effects and the Adjunction Site Theory}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1994}} @article{Beom-Mo:1994, Author = {Beom-Mo, Kang}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:08:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:09:02 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--24}, Title = {Plurality and Other Semantic Aspects of Common Nouns in {K}orean}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1994}} @article{Koizumi:1994, Author = {Koizumi, Masatoshi}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:06:56 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:07:23 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {25--79}, Title = {Secondary Predicates}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1994}} @article{Shi:1994a, Author = {Shi, Dingxu}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:05:44 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:06:14 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {81--100}, Title = {The Nature of {C}hinese Emphatic Sentences}, Volume = {3}, Year = {1994}} @article{Fukushima:1993, Author = {Fukushima, Kazuhiko}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:03:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:05:04 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {213--228}, Title = {Model Theoretic Semantics for {J}apanese Floating Quantifiers and Their Scope Properties}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Chien:1993, Author = {Chien, Yu-Chin and Wexler, Kenneth and Chang, Hsing-Wu}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:01:39 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:02:32 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {229--259}, Title = {Children's Development of Long-Distance Binding in {C}hinese}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Yip:1993, Author = {Yip, Moira}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 11:00:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 11:01:03 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {261--291}, Title = {Cantonese Loanword Phonology and {O}ptimality {T}heory}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Vovin:1993, Author = {Vovin, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 10:58:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 10:59:17 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {125--134}, Title = {Long Vowels in {P}roto-{J}apanese}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Li:1993a, Author = {Li, Yafei}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 10:57:34 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 10:58:34 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {135--166}, Title = {What Makes Long Distance Reflexives Possible?}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Heycock:1993a, Author = {Heycock, Caroline}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 10:56:21 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 10:57:25 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {167--211}, Title = {Syntactic Predication in {J}apanese}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Duanmu:1993, Author = {Duanmu, San}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 10:54:44 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 10:55:18 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--44}, Title = {Rime Length, Stress, and Association Domains}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Washio:1993, Author = {Washio, Ryuichi}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 10:53:12 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 10:53:51 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {45--90}, Title = {When Causatives Mean Passive: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Cole:1993, Author = {Cole, Peter and Hermon, Gabriella and Sung, Li-May}, Date-Added = {2009-12-30 10:50:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-30 10:52:02 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {91--118}, Title = {Feature Percolation}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1993}} @article{Lin:1992a, Author = {Lin, Jo-Wang}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:45:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:46:49 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {293--331}, Title = {The Syntax of Zenmeyan `How' and Weshenme `Why' in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Lust:1996, Author = {Lust, Barbara and Chien, Yu-Chin and Chiang, Chi-Pang and Eisele, Julie}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:43:14 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-31 10:10:25 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--47}, Title = {Chinese Pronominals in {U}niversal {G}rammar: A Study of Linear Precedence and Command in {C}hinese and {E}nglish Children's First Language Acquisition}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1996}} @article{Lin:1992, Author = {Lin, Yen-Hwei}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:41:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:43:07 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {219--253}, Title = {Vocalic Underspecification in Two {M}andarin Dialects: A Case against Radical Underspecification}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Han:1992, Author = {Han, Hak-Sung}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:38:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:39:16 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {215--218}, Title = {Notes on Reflexive Movement}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Chen:1992, Author = {Chen, Matthew Y.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:36:58 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:38:02 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {197--213}, Title = {The Chameleon [-r] in {Y}anggu: Morphological Infixation or Phonological Epenthesis?}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Nishigauchi:1992, Author = {Nishigauchi, Taisuke}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:35:31 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:36:09 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {157--196}, Title = {Syntax of Reciprocals in {J}apanese}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Li:1992, Author = {Li, Audrey Yen-Hui}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:34:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:35:18 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {12--155}, Title = {Indefinite \emph{Wh} in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Saito:1992a, Author = {Saito, Mamoru}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:32:03 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:32:54 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {69--118}, Title = {Long Distance Scrambling in {J}apanese}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Maling:1992, Author = {Maling, Joan and Kim, Soowon}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:30:03 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:30:51 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {37--68}, Title = {Case Assignment in the Inalienable Possession Construction in {K}orean}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Yip:1992, Author = {Yip, Moira}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:28:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:29:12 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--35}, Title = {Prosodic Morphology in Four Chinese Dialects}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Tomioka:2009, Abstract = {Intervention effects, triggered by the presence of an intervener c-commanding a Wh-phrase, are known to be weaker in WHY questions in Japanese and Korean. The existing analyses of this surprising phenomenon focus on the comparison between WHY questions and other Wh-questions but have not paid attention to the fact that the sentence is still judged more acceptable when an intervener does not c-command WHY. This paper presents a novel account that appeals to a peculiar presuppositional property of WHY questions and their impact on the information structure of Wh-questions. Unlike the previous analyses, the proposal can correctly derive graded acceptability of WHY questions in intervention contexts. It is also shown that the re-emergence of intervention effects with embedded WHY questions also has its root in the presupposition.}, Author = {Tomioka, S.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:10:36 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:11:30 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {253--271}, Title = {\emph{Why} questions, presuppositions, and intervention effects}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Liu:2009, Abstract = {In English demonstratives cannot co-occur with articles, so it is assumed that demonstratives should be treated as determiners (D). In some other languages, such as Spanish, postnominal demonstratives show no complementary distribution with articles; therefore, demonstratives are argued to be lexical heads projecting to lexical phrases (XP). In Jingpo, a Tibeto-Burman language, demonstratives which are inflected for number show relative freedom in syntactic distribution. Singular demonstratives can occur either prenominally, postnominally or appear twice to sandwich the head noun. Plural demonstratives can only occur postnominally. The relative freedom shown in the syntactic distribution of Jingpo demonstratives is accounted for in the present paper with the proposal that demonstratives in the right peripheral of the nominal phrase are D-type demonstratives and demonstratives adjacent to the head noun are A(djective)-type demonstratives. The analysis thus calls for a non-unitary treatment of demonstratives.}, Author = {Liu, H. and Gu, Y.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:08:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:09:34 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {273--295}, Title = {Free and not-so-free demonstratives in {J}ingpo}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Cheung:2009a, Abstract = {Widely attested cross-linguistically, the Negative WH (NWH)-construction involves the special use of wh-words (e.g., `where', `what', and `how') to convey negation in certain specific contexts. The first half of this paper identifies the negative assertion as the primary meaning of the NWH construction, in addition to two conventional implicatures. In the second half, I argue that the grammatical features in NWHCs in Chinese, Korean, and Japanese strongly suggest that NWHCs should be analyzed as interrogative wh-questions. The quantification domain of NWH-words is the sets of propositions that pick out the conversational backgrounds of the sentence (Kratzer 1977; Portner 2009). The NWHC can be paraphrased as ``What is the proposition q such that in view of q, p is true?'' However,the interrogative question can only receive a negative rhetorical interpretation (i.e., a question without a true answer) because the conventional implicatures make it impossible for p to be true against any of the conversational backgrounds.}, Author = {Cheung, Lawrence Yam-Leung}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:07:34 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:08:14 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {297--321}, Title = {Negative \emph{wh}-construction and its semantic properties}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hsu:2009a, Abstract = {This study examines young children's production of head-final relative clauses (RCs) in Chinese. Three different hypotheses (the Canonical Word Order Hypothesis, the Filler-gap Linear Distance Hypothesis, and the Structural Distance Hypothesis) have been proposed to account for the subject--object asymmetry found in children's performance with head-initial RCs in English. The structure of Chinese head-final RCs is minimally different from that of English head-initial RCs and thus provides an ideal case to examine the effect of different factors that are confounded in English. Our findings fail to support the Canonical Word Order Hypothesis and the Filler-gap Linear Distance Hypothesis. Instead, we suggest that it is the gap position in the hierarchical structure that affects children's production performance with subject-gapped and object-gapped RCs. Our findings also suggest that Mandarin Chinese does not belong to the group of East Asian languages which has been argued to have an acquisition pattern for RCs that is different from the one found in European languages. In addition, the cross-linguistic comparison of production errors suggests that the occurrence of the head noun in the sequential order of the production string affects the type of errors children make during the sentence production process.}, Author = {Hsu, Chun-Chieh Natalie and Hermon, Gabriella and Zukowski, Andrea}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:05:35 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:06:47 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {323--360}, Title = {Young children's production of head-final relative clauses: Elicited production data from {C}hinese children}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hsu:2009, Abstract = {How to represent a syllable is by no means a settled question in generative grammar. This paper employs the diagnostic tool Replace (X) to examine the sub- syllabic constituency in Old Chinese (OC) by virtue of two types of directional reduplication data: progressive and retrogressive reduplication. This paper finds that the OC syllable is comprised of onset, nucleus, and rhyme, which have different representations in the syllable structure. This paper also argues that the OC tone should be represented in terms of another independent plane, i.e., adjoining to the whole syllable rather than the rhyme sub-syllabic constituent, on the basis of the rhyming in Shijing `Book of Odes'. The OC medial glides -j- and -w- show an asymmetric status in syllable structure. The former tends to be aligned with the rhyme, while the latter tends to be aligned with onset. Comparing with other OC syllable structures, it is found that theoretical analyses reveal certain aspects of sub-syllabic processes, such as the placements of medial glides, and help us to examine syllabic representations such as tone representation, all of which may not be detected by direct observation of a maximal syllable in OC. Furthermore, a comparison of syllable structures in OC and Middle Chinese suggests that syllable structure, as well as other phonological phenomena, underwent great changes from OC to Middle Chinese or Guangyun phonology.}, Author = {Hsu, Dong-Bo}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:03:24 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:04:49 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {361--395}, Title = {The syllable in {O}ld {C}hinese: sub-syllabic processes, syllable structure, and the status of medial glides}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Irwin:2009, Abstract = {Research has shown there to be a strong relationship between the mora and prosody in Modern Japanese. Recently proposed, although not as yet independently evaluated, has been a prosodic size rule governing the well-known allomorphic phenomenon of rendaku, by which the initial consonants of non-initial elements in compounds may be voiced under certain conditions. It is claimed that this prosodic size rule flags a native Japanese noun as being rendaku immune, a condition for which no empirical verification has hitherto existed. In this paper the author will demonstrate that, although slight modifications are necessary, a prosodic size rule for flagging rendaku immunity is indeed a reality.}, Author = {Irwin, Mark}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:01:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:02:31 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {179--196}, Title = {Prosodic size and rendaku immunity}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Cheung:2009, Abstract = {The use of the Dislocation Focus Construction (DFC) (also known as ``Right Dislocation'') in colloquial Chinese (including Cantonese and Mandarin) gives rise to various non-canonical word orders. In DFCs, the sentence particle (SP) occurs in a sentence-medial position. The pre- and post-SP materials are demonstrated to be syntactically connected, based on four diagnostic tests, namely (i) the zinghai `only' test, (ii) the doudai (``wh-the-hell'') test, (iii) polarity item licensing, and (iv) Principle C violations. The findings offer new insights into the syntax of the Chinese left periphery and constraints on focus movement. First, the observations entail that Chinese CPs are head-initial, and an XP is obligatorily moved around the SP to a position higher than the CP. Second, the XP-raising in the DFC is argued to be driven by focus because of the focus interpretation induced. It is discovered that the focus movement is subject to the Spine Constraint, which turns out to be remarkably similar to the properties of the Nuclear Stress Rule (e.g., selection of focus set and metrical invisibility). It is argued that the DFC is the syntactic realization of the rule.}, Author = {Cheung, Lawrence Yam-Leung}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 13:00:34 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 13:01:43 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {197--232}, Title = {Dislocation focus construction in {C}hinese}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Miyamoto:2009, Abstract = {This paper examines one type of distributive interpretation in Japanese available only in sentences containing a numeral quantifier (NQ) with the distributive affix zutsu in a pre-nominal position. I propose that what appears to be the simple complex of an NQ with the distributive affix actually turns out to be a relative clause, which must appear within the NP. I further show that simple NQs can also be located inside the NP. The fundamental premise of my proposal is the predicative nature of NQs in Japanese (Miyagawa in structure and case marking in Japanese, 1989; Ueda in Oriental linguistics, 1986). The property of NQs in point allows us to account for the availability of the interpretation in question in Japanese.}, Author = {Miyamoto, Yoichi}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:58:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:59:43 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {233--251}, Title = {On the nominal-internal distributive interpretation in {J}apanese}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hayashishita:2009, Abstract = {This paper investigates the syntax and semantics of the Japanese com- parative construction that utilizes yori `than', which functionally corresponds to the English more-comparative. While endorsing Beck et al.'s (J East Asian Linguist 13: 289--344, 2004) general claim that yori-comparatives cannot be analyzed on a par with the English comparative, the paper points out the problems associated with their analysis. Among the points the paper maintains in contrast with Beck et al. (J East Asian Linguist 13: 289--344, 2004) are (i) the denotation of the complement of yori is a degree, an individual, or a proposition, and (ii) yori-phrases take a gradable predicate as their argument; thus yori-phrases participate in the semantic composition of the matrix clause. In describing the difference between English and Japanese regarding the phenomena involving gradable predicates, the paper advocates Snyder et al.'s (Proceedings of the Thirteenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 1994) hypothesis that AdjPs in Japanese lack the specifier position that hosts a degree variable or constant (cf. Fukui, A theory of category projection and its applications. Doctoral dissertation, 1986), dispensing with Beck et al.'s Degree Abstraction Parameter.}, Author = {Hayashishita, J.-R.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:57:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:58:07 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {65--100}, Title = {\emph{Yori}-comparatives: A reply to {B}eck et al. (2004)}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Yanagida:2009, Abstract = {This paper argues that Old Japanese (eighth century) had split alignment, with nominative-accusative alignment in main clauses and active alignment in nominalized clauses. The main arguments for active alignment in nominalized clause come from ga-marking of active subjects and the distribution of two verbal prefixes: i-for active predicates and sa- for inactive predicates (cf. Yanagida, In: Hasegawa (ed.) Nihongo no shubun gensho [Main clause phenomena in Japanese], 2007b). We review the treatment of non-accusative alignment and argue that active alignment should be analyzed as as a distinct type. We propose a formal analysis of active alignment in nominalized clauses in Old Japanese. The external argument is assigned inherent case, spelled out as ga, in situ in Spec, v. Object arguments are licensed by several distinct mechanisms, including incorporation (Yanagida, In: Miyamoto (ed.) MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 2007a) and case assignment by a functional head above vP. The latter accounts for the distinctive O wo S ga V word order of OJ nominalized clauses noted by Yanagida (J. of East Asian Linguistics, 2006). Inability to assign object case is a property of [nominal] v, as proposed by Miyagawa (Structure and case marking in Japanese. Syntax and Semantics, vol. 22, 1989). We discuss the diachronic origins of the OJ active alignment system and point out that it exemplifies a cross-linguistically attested pattern of non-accusative alignment in clauses that originate from nominalizations.}, Author = {Yanagida, Yuko and Whitman, John}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:55:31 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:56:51 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {101--144}, Title = {Alignment and word order in {O}ld {J}apanese}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Wu:2009a, Abstract = {In this paper, I argue that tense is a discourse feature in Mandarin if tense is extended to mean temporal location in general instead of grammaticalized location in time, as defined in Comrie (Tense, 1985). The evidence comes from the observation that tense does not affect temporal relations in Mandarin. The final endpoint imposed on an activity by past tense is not accessible to the other sentences in the same discourse while the final endpoint imposed by rhetorical relations, such as Narration, is. I argue that this difference results from the fact that in Mandarin tense does not impose a final endpoint until a coherent discourse is formed. I also discuss the implications of this paper for the determination of temporal locations in Mandarin, the status of Tense Phrase (TP) in Mandarin, the semantics of the perfective le, and modeling Mandarin discourse.}, Author = {Wu, Jiun-Shiung}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:54:03 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:54:48 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {145--165}, Title = {Tense as a discourse feature: rethinking temporal location in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Lin:2009, Abstract = {This paper investigates ``gapless'' bei passives in Mandarin Chinese and the way they are licensed. It is discovered that if the embedded predicate of a bei passive contains a weak NP, then the bei passive can be gapless. The proposal of this paper is that the weak NP introduces a variable, which can be bound by the operator Op at the embedded IP. Op need not move from an argument position in the embedded predicate of the bei passive; it can be merged directly to the embedded IP and bind the variable introduced by the weak NP.}, Author = {Lin, Tzong-Hong Jonah}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:52:39 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:53:22 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {167--177}, Title = {Licensing ``gapless'' \emph{bei} passives}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kuo:2009, Abstract = {Chinese is a language that classifies nouns into groups on the basis of shape, material, and size. We asked whether the classification of nouns by shape affects the degree to which Chinese speakers rely on shape when classifying objects. Three experiments examined the degree to which Chinese- and English- speaking adults rely on shape versus taxonomic or functional similarity in a classification task. Across all three experiments, Chinese speakers made significantly more shape choices than English speakers though they both mostly classified objects on the basis of taxonomic or functional similarity. Reliance on shape by speakers of Chinese was correlated with amount of exposure to Chinese. The results offer evidence in support of the idea that language influences categorization, or a weak form of the Whorf Hypothesis. The results also call into question the widely-held belief that speakers of all classifier languages pay less attention to shape in classification.}, Author = {Kuo, Jenny Yi-chun and Sera, Maria D.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:50:50 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:51:48 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--19}, Title = {Classifier effects on human categorization: the role of shape classifiers in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Noh:2009, Abstract = {The Korean conditional markers myen and tamyen have been distin- guished in terms of the speaker's epistemic stance: while myen can be used with any speaker attitude, tamyen is only used with a hypothetical or irrealis attitude. However, tamyen-antecedents do not always express such an irrealis speaker atti- tude. This paper analyses the difference between myen and tamyen in terms of the modes of language use, i.e., descriptive and metarepresentational uses. It introduces the concept of interpretive use as defined and used in relevance theory and suggests that the ta in tamyen functions as an interpretive use marker. The presence of this interpretive use marker is responsible for the different felicities between myen- and tamyen-conditionals. Since a tamyen-antecedent is a metarepresentation of another representation, it is not used to describe a state of affairs in the content domain. This explains why deictic, generic, and temporal conditionals are more often used with myen, and given conditionals (i.e., conditionals whose antecedents are contextually given) with tamyen.}, Author = {Noh, Eun-Ju}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:49:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:50:07 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {21--39}, Title = {The {K}orean conditional markers \emph{myen} and \emph{tamyen}: epistemicity vs. modes of language use}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Takita:2009, Abstract = {One of the important topics in current syntactic theory is whether there is a directionality parameter in Universal Grammar. Based on the observation that the presence of Chinese sentence-final aspectual particles blocks movement out of their complement, Lin (Complement-to-Specifier movement in Mandarin Chinese. MS., National Tsing Hua University, 2006) argues that each of these particles is the head of an underlyingly head-initial phrase and that the surface head-final order is derived by movement of its complement. Thus, movement out of it violates the Condition on Extraction Domain [CED: Huang (Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD dissertation, MIT, 1982)]. Taking this analysis as a diagnostic that distinguishes a derived head-final structure from a genuine one, this paper illustrates that it is not the case that Japanese head-final structures are derived from head-initial ones. Our result implies that Universal Grammar is equipped with a directionality parameter, admitting not only head-initial structures but also head- final structures.}, Author = {Takita, Kensuke}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:47:46 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:49:01 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {41--61}, Title = {If {C}hinese is head-initial, {J}apanese cannot be}, Volume = {18}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hsieh:2008, Abstract = {In this paper we present the results of a study of the tonal adaptation of a corpus of c. 300 Mandarin and 40 English loanwords in Lhasa Tibetan drawn from Yu et al.'s (Colloquial Lhasa Tibetan-Chinese Dictionary, 1980). Our principal finding is that no equivalence is made between the Mandarin tones/English stress contours and Lhasa Tibetan tones. Instead, tones are assigned by a combination of default rules of Tibetan grammar and UG enhancement processes familiar from the tonogenesis literature.}, Author = {Hsieh, Feng-fan and Kenstowicz, Michael}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:45:31 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:46:32 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {279--297}, Title = {Phonetic knowledge in tonal adaptation: {M}andarin and {E}nglish loanwords in {L}hasa {T}ibetan}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kang:2008, Abstract = {In this paper we present the results of a study of Japanese-influenced English loanwords in Korean. We identify some 10 phonological indexes that identify the loan's Japanese provenance and examine their relative rate of retention in 287 loan forms that show a mixture of Japanese-style and direct-English-style phonological characteristics. Our chief finding is that certain traits of Japanese-style loanwords are more resistant to change to the direct English style of adaptation that is applied to contemporary loans. We consider two possible explanations for such a hierarchy. First, the resistance hierarchy reflects the relative perceptual saliency of the relevant features (cf. Steriade, 2001). Second, the resistance hierarchy reflects the degree of confidence Korean speakers have about the ``correct'' direct-English borrowing pattern.}, Author = {Kang, Yoonjung and Kenstowicz, Michael and Ito, Chiyuki}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:43:39 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:44:45 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {299--316}, Title = {Hybrid loans: a study of {E}nglish loanwords transmitted to {K}orean via {J}apanese}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kawahara:2008, Abstract = {This paper argues that phonetic naturalness and unnaturalness can interact within a single grammatical system. In Japanese loanword phonology, only voiced geminates, but not voiced singletons, devoice to dissimilate from another voiced obstruent. The neutralizability difference follows from a ranking which Japanese speakers created on perceptual grounds: IDENT(voi)Sing >> IDENT(voi)Gem. On the other hand, the trigger of devoicing---OCP(voi)---has no phonetic underpin- ning because voicing does not have phonetic characteristics that would naturally lead to confusion-based dissimilation (Ohala, Proceedings of Chicago Linguistic Society: Papers from the parasession on language and behaviour, 1981, in: Jones (ed.) Historical linguistics: Problems and perspectives, 1993). OCP(voi) in Modern Japanese originated as a phonetically natural OCP(prenasal) in Old Japanese because the spread out heavy nasalization would lead to perceptual confusion, but it divorced from its phonetic origin when prenasalization became voicing. The interaction of the three constraints in Modern Japanese suggests that phonetic naturalness (the ranking IDENT(voi)Sing >> IDENT(voi)Gem) and unnaturalness (OCP(voi)) co-reside within a single module.}, Author = {Kawahara, Shigeto}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:41:35 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:42:51 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {317--330}, Title = {Phonetic naturalness and unnaturalness in {J}apanese loanword phonology}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kim:2008a, Abstract = {The purpose of the present study is two-fold. First is to propose that an L1 (host language) speakers' perception of L2 (donor language) sounds is conditioned by the acoustic cues to the laryngeal features of the L1 grammar in the loanword adaptation of Korean voiceless stops into Japanese and of the Japanese voicing contrast and voiceless geminates into Korean. Second is to suggest the enhancing role of some L2 or L1 phonetic properties in perceiving L2 variant(s) as distinctive according to the system of L1 features in loanword adaptation.}, Author = {Kim, Hyunsoon}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:40:13 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:41:04 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {331--346}, Title = {Loanword adaptation between {J}apanese and {K}orean: evidence for {L1} feature-driven perception}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Luke:2008, Abstract = {In spite of a powerful preference for bisyllabicity identified in previous research on loanword truncation in Cantonese, more new forms are increasingly found which have been truncated down to a monosyllable. An examination of a 1,400-word corpus of Cantonese loanwords collected over a span of 50 years reveals a significant increase in the number of loan verbs and adjectives in more recent times, as opposed to the almost exclusive adoption of nouns previously. Verbs, as opposed to nouns, are found to be much more prone to undergoing ``monosyllabic truncation.'' This is found to stem from an asymmetry between nouns and verbs in the native language. A preference for monosyllabicity, particularly in the case of verbs and adjectives, is confirmed via a study of a Cantonese translation of the Swadesh word list. A further investigation of a corpus of everyday conversations uncovers lexical statistics that may have been mirrored in the truncation process. Finally, the greater readiness for the importation of verbs in more recent times is explained in terms of Haugen's ``stages of bilingualism.''}, Author = {Luke, Kang-kwong and Lau, Chaak-ming}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:38:38 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:40:00 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {347--362}, Title = {On loanword truncation in {C}antonese}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Lin:2008a, Abstract = {This study examines which English vowel is matched with which vowel in Standard Mandarin in loanword adaptation, investigates the general patterns for and restrictions on vowel adaptation in Standard Mandarin loanwords, and determines which aspects of vowel quality is more carefully replicated than others. The results show that despite the seemingly high degree of variation, there are systematic patterns: (i) the front-back dimension is more faithfully replicated than height and rounding, (ii) deviation along the height dimension is tolerated but minimal, (iii) a rounding mismatch occurs mostly in adapting mid central/back vowels, and (iv) central vowels behave as if they are unspecified for or ambiguous between front and back. This study demonstrates how the grammar prioritizes which aspects to replicate in the loanword adaptation process and has implications for theories of loanword phonology in particular and feature theory in general.}, Author = {Lin, Yen-Hwei}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:37:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:38:00 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {363--380}, Title = {Variable vowel adaptation in {S}tandard {M}andarin loanwords}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Matsuura:2008, Abstract = {This paper investigates tonal phenomena in Nagasaki Japanese (NJ), especially in loanwords, and argues that the pitch accent system of NJ is sensitive to the position of pitch fall rather than the presence vs. absence of pitch fall. There are two types of tonal patterns that may occur in an NJ word: Type A tone (a fall pitch pattern) and Type B tone (a non-fall pitch pattern). Previous studies on ongoing tonal changes in Kagoshima Japanese (KJ), which has a tonal system similar to that of NJ, revealed that accented words in Tokyo Japanese (TJ) are realized as Type A tones and unaccented words in TJ are realized as Type B tones in KJ. In contrast, a loanword in NJ is realized as a Type A tone if the loanword is accented on either of the first two morae in TJ; otherwise the loanword is realized as a Type B tone in NJ. This paper proposes that both NJ and KJ speakers have TJ forms as input, but only NJ speakers delete an accent on the third or later mora during the adaptation process. The proposal accounts for the tonal neutralization of compounds in NJ, which occurs when the first member contains three or more morae.}, Author = {Matsuura, Toshio}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:35:40 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:36:29 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {381--397}, Title = {Position sensitivity in {N}agasaki {J}apanese prosody}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Lin:2008, Abstract = {This paper investigates tone sandhi phenomena in the Chinese dialect of Tianjin, which are noteworthy for the rule application direc- tionalities observed in tri-tonal strings. The rule application directionalities appear to be ungoverned, as none of the principles proposed to date that may contribute to determining directionalities can account for them. Based on the constraint-based theory of OT, this paper shows that the rule operation directionalities in Tianjin are by no means ungoverned. Normally tone sandhi applies from left to right for identity reasons. This is captured by the OO-faithfulness constraint IDENT-BOT, which requires identity between prosodically related outputs. The left-to-right directionality is sacrificed only when it would result in output forms that involve marked sequences or toneme deletion at the prominent edge of a tone, which are for- bidden by the markedness constraint OCP-T and the positional IO-faithfulness constraint MAX-IO-t-R, respectively. Thus the rule application directionalities in Tianjin are naturally predicted by the interaction of IDENT-BOT, OCP-T, and MAX-IO-t-R, where IDENT-BOT must be dominated by the latter two con- straints.}, Author = {Lin, Hui-shan}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:34:04 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:34:41 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {181--226}, Title = {Variable directional applications in {T}ianjin tone sandhi}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Xiang:2008, Abstract = {The Mandarin functional morpheme dou appears to have been interpreted, among other things, as a distributor, focus marker even, or already. This paper aims at providing a unified semantic account for these different uses. I argue that the semantic core of these different usages is the same: dou is simply a maximality operator. It gives rise to different meanings by applying maximality to a contextually determined plural set. This could be a set of covers, a set of focus-induced alternatives, or a set of degrees ordered on a scale. This analysis also connects dou in these contexts with dou in environments that license polarity items, as discussed in Giannakidou and Cheng (J Semant 23: 135--183, 2006).}, Author = {Xiang, Ming}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:31:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:31:52 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {227--245}, Title = {Plurality, maximality and scalar inferences: A case study of {M}andarin \emph{Dou}}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Saito:2008, Abstract = {It has been widely assumed since Kitagawa and Ross (Linguist Anal 9: 19--53, 1982) that noun phrases in Chinese and Japanese are quite similar in structure. They are N-final in surface word order, they employ ``modifying markers'' (de in Chinese and no in Japanese) extensively, and they require classifiers for numeral expressions. In this paper, we argue that, contrary to appearance, they have quite distinct structures. We examine N'-ellipsis in the two languages and present sup- porting evidence for the hypothesis argued for by Simpson (in: Tang and Liu (eds.) On the formal way to Chinese languages, 2003), among others, that Chinese noun phrases are head-initial. According to this hypothesis, de is D, and a classifier heads another projection within DP. Japanese noun phrases, on the other hand, are head- final. No is a contextual Case marker, as proposed by Kitagawa and Ross (Linguist Anal 9: 19--53, 1982), and classifier phrases are adjuncts modifying nominal projections. Our discussion shows that Kayne's (The antisymmetry of syntax, 1994) analysis of N-final relatives applies elegantly to Chinese but not to Japanese. It thus suggests that Japanese relative clauses are head-final throughout the derivation.}, Author = {Saito, Mamoru and Lin, Jonah T.-H. and Murasugi, Keiko}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:28:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:30:13 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {247--271}, Title = {N$'$-ellipsis and the structure of noun phrases in {C}hinese and {J}apanese}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Tsai:2008, Abstract = {This article concerns the ``topography'' of the Left Periphery, in particular, the syntactic distribution of how-questions across languages and their corresponding semantic interpretations. Causal wh and reason wh are analyzed as sentential operators in the left periphery, which scope over the entire IP and take the corresponding event/state as their complements. By contrast, manner and instrumental wh's are both analyzed as vP-modifiers, which translate into restrictive predicates of the underlying event argument associated with the peripheral area of vP. These wh-expressions differ dramatically with respect to their behavior towards locality principles. On the one hand, only instrumental wh, but not manner wh, may escape from strong island effects and weak intervention effects. On the other, they both observe strong intervention effects, triggered by negation and A-not-A questions. It is suggested that this apparent paradox can be solved by a generalized version of Relativized Minimality proposed in Rizzi (Structures and beyond. The cartography of syntactic structures. Oxford University Press, New York, 2004).}, Author = {Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:25:28 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:28:01 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {83--115}, Title = {Left periphery and \emph{how-why} alternations}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Lee:2008a, Abstract = {This paper uncovers a systematic correlation between semantics of aspect and syntactic argument structure as manifested in the difference between two imperfective aspect markers -ko iss and -a iss in Korean. Unlike the common assumption that the -ko iss form is a progressive marker, while the -a iss form is a resultative marker, this paper argues that the difference between the two derives from their different argument structure: -ko iss selects transitive and unergative verbs, which have an external argument, while -a iss selects unaccusative and passive verbs, which only have an internal theme argument. It is argued that the difference in argument structure is determined by semantic event structure depending on agentivity in Korean. The results of the paper have broader implications for the issues of syntax and semantics interface and unaccusativity.}, Author = {Lee, EunHee}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:23:55 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:24:44 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {117--139}, Title = {Argument structure and event structure: the case of {K}orean imperfective constructions}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kishimoto:2008, Abstract = {One controversial issue in the literature on Japanese concerns the question of whether the surface accusative-dative order of ditransitive constructions is base-generated or derived by syntactic movement. In the light of nominalized clauses in which dative-V and accusative-V idioms are embedded, this article shows that ditransitive verbs project an argument structure whereby dative arguments could be base-generated to either the left or the right of accusative arguments, as countenanced by the base-generation hypothesis for the argument order of ditransitive verbs. Nevertheless, dative arguments are not freely ordered relative to accusative arguments. We argue that with ordinary ditransitive verbs, only the dative-accusative order is available by base-generation, the reverse order being derived via syntactic movement, as conceived by the movement hypothesis. We suggest that the dative position below an accusative argument does not reside in a h-marking domain, and thus it can be filled only by idiomatic dative arguments that are interpreted without h-role assignment. The data show that both base-generation and movement analyses are necessary for characterizing the word order variation of Japanese ditransitive verbs.}, Author = {Kishimoto, Hideki}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:22:40 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:23:14 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {141--179}, Title = {Ditransitive idioms and argument structure}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Wu:2008, Abstract = {This study provides supporting evidence for the claim in Sohn (Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 12:307--324, 2006) that the nature of the geminate output in Korean sonorant assimilation is crucially dependent on the stem-final sonorant. Given the generally accepted claim of positional faithfulness to the onset (Lombardi, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13:39--74, 1995; Beckman, Positional faithfulness, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1998; Casali, Resolving hiatus, University of California, Los Angeles, 1998), however, the coda saliency effect observed in Korean sonorant assimilation is intriguing. Drawing on a theory of Licensing by Cue and the P-map hypothesis (Steriade, Phonetics in phonology: The case of laryngeal neutralization, UCLA, 1997; Steriade, The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization, UCLA, 2001), this study claims that coda saliency is a language-specific phonological reflex of the contrast asymmetry in the lexical representation and in acoustic cues. The asymmetry in functional load depending on the position is reflected in the perception of similarity, namely whether the difference between two alveolar sonorants is less distinctive or robust in word-initial vs. word-final position. Based on similarity ranking by reference to the perceptibility difference, this study argues that the marginally contrastive sonorant in the onset is more likely to be the target of neutralization than is the sonorant in the coda, whose contrastiveness is well-grounded in Korean phonology.}, Author = {Wu, Jiun-Shiung}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:21:08 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:21:53 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--32}, Title = {Terminability, wholeness and semantics of experiential \emph{guo}}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Sohn:2008, Abstract = {This study provides supporting evidence for the claim in Sohn (Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 12:307--324, 2006) that the nature of the geminate output in Korean sonorant assimilation is crucially dependent on the stem-final sonorant. Given the generally accepted claim of positional faithfulness to the onset (Lombardi, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13:39--74, 1995; Beckman, Positional faithfulness, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1998; Casali, Resolving hiatus, University of California, Los Angeles, 1998), however, the coda saliency effect observed in Korean sonorant assimilation is intriguing. Drawing on a theory of Licensing by Cue and the P-map hypothesis (Steriade, Phonetics in phonology: The case of laryngeal neutralization, UCLA, 1997; Steriade, The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization, UCLA, 2001), this study claims that coda saliency is a language-specific phonological reflex of the contrast asymmetry in the lexical representation and in acoustic cues. The asymmetry in functional load depending on the position is reflected in the perception of similarity, namely whether the difference between two alveolar sonorants is less distinctive or robust in word-initial vs. word-final position. Based on similarity ranking by reference to the perceptibility difference, this study argues that the marginally contrastive sonorant in the onset is more likely to be the target of neutralization than is the sonorant in the coda, whose contrastiveness is well-grounded in Korean phonology.}, Author = {Sohn, Hyang-Sook}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:18:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:20:14 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {33--59}, Title = {Phonological contrast and coda saliency of sonorant assimilation in {K}orean}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Tham:2008, Abstract = {I show that in Mandarin specificational copular sentences (sentences headed by the copula shi, in which the subject NP is typically a definite or indefinite description), the subject NP should be treated as a referential, rather than a predicative expression. This conclusion bears on the recent debate on whether specificational copular sentences should be treated as equative or as (inverted) predicational sentences, coming out against the latter. Evidence is adduced from (i) the distribution of the copula in nominal and non-nominal predication sentences, which I show also suggests that the Mandarin copula has a predicate-creation function; and (ii) asymmetries in the interpretation of bare nouns and indefinite NPs in the subject and complement positions of shi.}, Author = {Tham, Shiao Wei}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:17:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:20:37 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {61--82}, Title = {The semantic category of the subject {NP} in {M}andarin specificational copular sentences}, Volume = {17}, Year = {2008}} @article{Zhang:2007a, Abstract = {Chinese tone sandhi systems are often classified as left-dominant or right-dominant depending on the position of the syllable retaining the citation tone. An asymmetry exists between the two types of systems: left-dominant sandhi often involves rightward extension of the initial tone to the entire sandhi domain; right-dominant sandhi, however, often involves default insertion and paradigmatic neutralization of nonfinal tones. I argue that the extension of a tone to a larger domain may serve two markedness purposes: the reduction of tonal contours on a syllable and the reduction of pitch differences across syllable boundaries, both of which have a rightward directionality preference. The former is due to the durational advantage afforded by final lengthening; the latter is due to the universal preference for progressive tonal coarticulation. I show that a theory that formally encodes these preferences via intrinsic constraint rankings can predict the directional asymmetry noted above.}, Author = {Zhang, Jie}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:15:44 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:16:23 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {259--302}, Title = {A directional asymmetry in {C}hinese tone sandhi systems}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Kim:2007, Abstract = {Honorification in Korean recognizes the elevated social status of a participant in a clause with respect to the subject and/or the hearer. Honorific marking may be manifest as a nominal suffix, a special honorific form of a noun, an honorific case particle, an honorific marker on a verb, or a special honorific form of a verb. Previous accounts have typically proposed a honorification feature specified as [HON +], with unmarked forms being [HON )]. The key idea in this paper is that these approaches are misguided and that honorification is a privative feature, syntactically and semantically. On the syntactic side, we argue that the frequently adopted position that honorific marking in Korean is a kind of subject--verb agreement is deeply misguided. Few previous accounts succeed with regard to the full range of facts, which are of three types. First, multiple expressions of honorific marking within the same clause progressively elevate the social status of the referent: the effect is cumulative, which [HON $\pm$] cannot describe. Second, under previous analyses, some nouns have to be given a spurious and ultimately inconsistent ambiguity with respect to their honorific properties. Third, the different expressions of ``honorification'' do not mean exactly the same thing, which makes an account of multiple honorification within a clause in terms of agreement implausible. On the semantic side, we, building on ideas in Potts (The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005) and Potts and Kawahara (Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory. CLC Publications, Ithaca, NY, pp. 235--254, 2004), propose that honorific forms introduce a dimension of meaning in the realm of expressive meaning. As a kind of expressive meaning, honorification is simply absent from all forms which are not positively marked for expressing it.}, Author = {Kim, Jong-Bok and Sells, Peter}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:11:49 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:12:43 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {303--336}, Title = {Korean honorification: a kind of expressive meaning}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Barrie:2007, Abstract = {The goal of this paper is twofold. First, it discusses the tonal systems of several Chinese languages within the framework of the Theory of the Contrastive Hierarchy (Dresher et al. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 13:3--27, 1994; Dresher Talk Presented at Meeting of the Canadian Linguistics Association, University of Ottawa, 1998, Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 20:47--62, 2003a, Asymmetry in grammar: Morphology, phonology, acquisition. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins, Vol. 2, pp. 239--257, 2003b). In particular, this paper demonstrates that disparities between phonetic characteristics of tones and their phonological activity can be understood as a kind of underspecification that the Contrastive Hierarchy affords. The second goal of this paper is to propose an analysis in which contour tones in Chinese languages generally are represented as unitary entities rather than as a concatenation of level tones (Tone Clusters). This contrasts with the tonal systems found in African languages, in which contour tones are demonstrably composed of level tones. Thus, this paper argues for the existence of two types of contour tones in natural language: unitary contour tones and Tone Clusters.}, Author = {Barrie, Michael}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 12:09:29 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 12:11:28 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {337--362}, Title = {Contour tones and contrast in {C}hinese languages}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Tamaoka:2007, Abstract = {The present study conducted four experiments to investigate how modality information provided through the sentence-final particles -yo and -ne were utilized in identifying an empty subject by native Japanese speakers. Experiment 1 conducted a whole-sentence anomaly decision task, finding that base sentences without -yo and -ne attached were processed more quickly than sentences with either -yo or -ne and that sentences with -yo were processed more quickly than the same sentences with -ne. A delay in processing sentences with -ne was created by the ambiguity of an empty subject identified by -ne as either `I' or `you'. In Experiment 2, the auxiliary verb -ou `let us' was added to the base sentence before -yo and -ne, providing a cue to identify the empty subject as `we'. Although the base sentences were processed more quickly than those containing the particles -yo and -ne, no other difference resulted from the attachment of these particles. To eliminate the possibility of orthographic-length effects, Experiment 3 compared base sentences with -ou, -ou-yo, and -ou-ne, finding no difference among them (i.e., no orthographic-length effects). Experiment 4 was conducted to further eliminate the possible involvement of discourse-level computation by utilizing base sentences with overt subjects, past tense verbs, and the auxiliary verb -rasii `appear to'. Once subjects of sentences were clearly shown, there was no difference among base sentences and those with either -yo or -ne attached (i.e., no discourse-level computation effects). Thus the present study proved that the modality information inherent in the particles -yo and -ne was used for identifying empty subjects.}, Author = {Tamaoka, Katsuo and Matsumoto, Michiaki and Sakamoto, Tsutomu}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:54:38 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:57:08 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {145--170}, Title = {Identifying empty subjects by modality information: the case of the {J}apanese sentence-final particles \emph{-yo} and \emph{-ne}}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Ivana:2007, Abstract = {This paper deals with the syntactic structure of subject-honorific and object-honorific constructions in Japanese through a detailed examination of the morphological make-up of the so-called honorific form of verbs. The main claim is that the honorific form of verbs actually consists of separate morphemes, which include honorific prefixes, verb stems, nominalisation suffixes, and light verbs. We further argue that the honorific prefix o-, which has been generally disregarded in previous literature, is a functional category which heads its own projection. The proposed analysis solves a long-standing problem in the investigation of Japanese honorific constructions, as to why honorific verbs cannot be separated from light verbs, originally pointed out by Harada (1976). Furthermore, this analysis shows how the syntactic distinction between the light verbs naru and suru leads to the meaning difference between the subject-honorific and object-honorific constructions.}, Author = {Ivana, Adrian and Sakai, Hiromu}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:53:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:53:52 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {171--191}, Title = {Honorification and light verbs in {J}apanese}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Ljungvist:2007, Abstract = {In this paper, I propose a relevance-theoretic account of the particles le, guo and zhe in Mandarin Chinese. Though conventionally regarded as aspect markers, on closer inspection they seem to contribute to a range of interpretations that cannot be subsumed under a semantic category or a specific temporal representation. The explanatory model presented in this paper builds upon relevance- theoretic ideas on encoded procedural meaning and Reichenbach's (1947, Elements of symbolic logic. London: Macmillan) temporal schemas for the tenses and the aspects. I propose a procedure---a set of interpretational instructions (as described in, among others, Wilson and Sperber (1993b, Lingua, 90, 1--25), Blakemore (1987, Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000, Journal of Linguistics, 36(3), 463--486) and Carston (2002, Thought and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.))---and a concept activated by the procedure for each of the particles. I show that these particles can contribute to a range of explicatures and implicatures and that their exact contribution to an utterance is highly context dependent.}, Author = {Ljungvist, Marita}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:51:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:52:18 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {193--235}, Title = {\emph{Le}, \emph{guo} and \emph{zhe} in {M}andarin {C}hinese: a relevance-theoretic account}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Lin:2007, Abstract = {This paper argues that the most recent analyses of guo as proposed in Pan and Lee [(2004). The role of pragmatics in interpreting the Chinese perfective markers -Guo and -Le. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 441--446] and Lin [(2006). Time in a language without tense: The case of Chinese. Journal of Semantics, 23, 1--53] still fail to explain the predicate restriction and the discontinuity property of guo in a satisfying manner. An alternative analysis, which is a more fine-grained version of Lin's (2006) proposal, is suggested. It is proposed that a sentence with the form guo(P) is true in a world w if and only if the run time of the internal stage of an event described by P is wholly before the speech time, and if the event e has a target state, then there is an inertia world w in r stretching from w such that another event e' described also by P but distinct from e true in it at an interval containing the speech time.}, Author = {Lin, Jo-Wang}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:49:28 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:50:25 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {237--257}, Title = {Predicate restriction, discontinuity property and the meaning of the perfective marker \emph{Guo} in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Heffernan:2007, Abstract = {When a language adapts words from another language, the adapting language (L1) naturally tries to retain the phonemic contrasts of the source language (L2). However, if the L2 has a greater degree of contrast than the L1 then either the extra degree(s) of contrast will be lost, or the L1 must introduce markedness into its phonological system. The objective of this article is twofold. First, I argue that the introduction of markedness into the L1's phonology when adapting words from another language correlates with the social relation- ship between the languages. I demonstrate this by examining the retention of phonemic contrast in the various stages of the adaptation of Chinese words into Japanese. Second, I argue for a phonological constraint that enforces the retention of L2's phonemic contrast, DISTINCT. An Optimality Theoretic analysis of the adaptation of Sino-Japanese produces the expected results for all of stages of adaptation except one---the stage when contact between the two languages is at its peak. For this stage, the analysis requires the addition of the DISTINCT constraint.}, Author = {Heffernan, Kevin}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:47:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:49:02 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {61--86}, Title = {The role of phonemic contrast in the formation of {S}ino-{J}apanese}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Stanford:2007, Abstract = {An intricate system of adjective intensification permeates Sui, a Tai-Kadai minority language of Guizhou Province, China. Sui adjective intensifiers show evidence of partial reduplication involving a complex interplay of morpho-phonological processes: rhyme, alliteration, The Emergence of The Unmarked (TETU), and identity avoidance patterns that support Kennard's ``Copy but don't repeat'' [(2004). Phonology, 21(3), 303--323]. This Sui phenomenon has never been reported to the wider linguistic community beyond Guizhou, and it provides valu- able theoretical insight into reduplication and related morpho-phonological pro- cesses. Moreover, the interaction of these morpho-phonological processes forms a system of patterned variety that may be viewed as a poeticized lexicon or lexicalized poetry, thus illustrating the presence of extensive poetic effects embedded within the core grammar. In this way, Sui provides strong support for Yip's observation that ``humans have both an aptitude and a taste for creating repetitive sequences, and they may use this skill in a variety of ways that are more or less part of the core grammar of the language'' [(1999). Glot International, 4.8, 1--7].}, Author = {Stanford, James N.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:45:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:46:44 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {87--111}, Title = {Sui Adjective Reduplication as Poetic Morpho-Phonology}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Kawahara:2007, Abstract = {Using data from a large-scale corpus, this paper establishes the claim that in Japanese rap rhymes, the degree of similarity of two consonants positively correlates with their likelihood of making a rhyme pair. For example, similar consonant pairs like {m-n}, {t-s}, and {r-n} frequently rhyme whereas dissimilar consonant pairs like {m-{\`o}}, {w-k}, and {n-p} rarely do. The current study adds to a body of literature that suggests that similarity plays a fundamental role in half rhyme formation (A. Holtman, 1996, A generative theory of rhyme: An optimality approach, PhD dissertation. Utrecht Institute of Linguistics; R. Jakobson, 1960, Linguistics and poetics: Language in literature, Harvard University Press, Cambridge; D. Steriade, 2003, Knowledge of similarity and narrow lexical override, Proceedings of Berkeley Linguistics Society, 29, 583--598; A. Zwicky, 1976, This rock-and-roll has got to stop: Junior's head is hard as a rock. Proceedings of Chicago Linguistics Society, 12, 676--697). Furthermore, it is shown that Japanese speakers take acoustic details into account when they compose rap rhymes. This study thus supports the claim that speakers possess rich knowledge of psychoacoustic similarity (D. Steriade, 2001a, Directional asymmetries in place assimilation. In E. Hume, & K. Johnson (Eds.), The role of speech perception in phonology (pp. 219--250). San Diego: Academic Press.; D. Steriade, 2001b, The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization, ms., University of California, Los Angeles; D. Steriade, 2003, Knowledge of similarity and narrow lexical override, Proceedings of Berkeley Linguistics Society, 29, 583--598).}, Author = {Kawahara, Shigeto}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:44:21 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:45:12 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {113--144}, Title = {Half rhymes in {J}apanese rap lyrics and knowledge of similarity}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Lee:2007, Abstract = {This paper compares the Korean past tense marker -ess with another past form -essess (double past), the distinction between which has been controversial among Korean linguists, and provides a discourse-based semantic analysis of them. It is argued that -ess and -essess are logically distinguished in terms of dynamic versus stative information in dynamic semantics, which is more or less in line with the distinction between the English past and the past perfect. The simple past in English and the Korean -ess at least have the potential to give dynamic information, updating the given context with a new event and shifting the current temporal perspective. The English past perfect and the Korean -essess, on the other hand, provide stative, background information, preserving the given context. However, while the English past perfect is ambiguous between preterit and aspectual interpretations, Korean -essess has only the preterit interpretation, triggering a flashback effect in narratives. Their semantic properties and differences are represented in Discourse Representation Theory.}, Author = {Lee, Eun-Hee}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:42:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:43:24 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--25}, Title = {Dynamic and Stative Information in Temporal Reasoning: Interpretation of {K}orean Past Markers in Narrative Discourse}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Zhang:2007, Abstract = {This article uses a multilevel approach to study the Chinese numeral classifiers. It argues that although shape categories constitute a major cognitive base for numeral classification, lexical taxonomy, linguistic convention, and stylistic creativity also play a role in determining the use of Chinese classifiers. It cautions that in general the relationship between noun and classifier is explicable from the semantic/ cognitive stance, but the relationship is not always transparent and consistent. At times the choice of a classifier can be entirely arbitrary and subject to linguistic innovation.}, Author = {Zhang, Hong}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:40:26 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:41:21 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {43--59}, Title = {Numeral classifiers in {M}andarin {C}hinese}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2007}} @article{Jun:2006, Abstract = {This study investigates the underlying tonal pattern of pitch accent, tone interaction, focus effects, and the prosodic structure of Northern Kyungsang Korean (NKK) by examining tone-syllable alignment and the realization of pitch accent in different tonal/prosodic contexts. Based on quantitative data, we propose that the underlying tone of pitch accent is H*+L and that the left edge of a prosodic word is marked by a low boundary tone (%L). Our observation, with respect to the tone interaction of different lexical classes, shows evidence in favor of the downstep/ upstep account [Kenstowicz & Sohn (1997) Focus and phrasing in Northern Kyungsang Korean. In P.-M. Bertinetto (Ed.), Certamen Phonologicum III, (pp. 137--156). Torino: Rosenberg and Sellier. (Also in MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 30, 25--47, 1997)], as opposed to the H-tone deletion account (e.g., G. Kim (1988) The Pitch-accent System of the Taegu Dialect of Korean with Emphasis on Tone Sandhi at the Phrasal Level, PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii.). The data also indicate that surface representations of NKK are sparsely specified for tone. Most importantly, we found that the prosodic cue of focus differs depending on the location of the pitch accent within a prosodic word. We conclude that the prosodic goal of focus in NKK is in the pitch range expansion of the focused phrase, which is implemented by expanding the pitch range of the most prominent word within the phrase, regardless of whether it is the focused word or not.}, Author = {Jun, Jongho and Kim, Jungsun and Lee, Hayoung and Jun, Sun-Ah}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:37:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:38:42 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {289--317}, Title = {The prosodic structure of pitch accent of {N}orthern {K}yungsang {K}orean}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2006}} @article{Bruening:2006a, Abstract = {The question of whether wh-in situ stays in situ, or undergoes some form of covert wh-movement that parallels overt wh-movement, remains controversial despite decades of research. We present data from Vietnamese which indicate that wh-in situ can be interpreted by either covert movement or unselective binding without movement. Covert movement takes place in matrix questions that lack a question particle, while unselective binding is used when there is a question particle and in embedded questions generally. The Vietnamese data also show that covert movement observes the same constraints---in particular, Subjacency---as overt movement. The correlation between unselective binding and the question particle in matrix questions appears to support recent theoretical views of question particles (e.g., Cheng, 1991), but we argue that this is only apparent. The question particle merely serves a syntactic licensing function, and this function is borne by a question- embedding verb in embedded questions, meaning that it is not inherent to question particles as such. The question particle in Vietnamese actually serves an unrelated semantic function: it indicates realis mood and induces a presupposition. The implication is that question particles are only indirectly related to wh-in situ, if they are related at all.}, Author = {Bruening, Benjamin and Tran, Thuan}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:34:48 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:35:38 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {319--341}, Title = {Wh-Questions in {V}ietnamese}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2006}} @article{Huang:2006, Abstract = {It has been observed that there is a complementary distribution between simple adjectives (SAs) and complex adjectives (CAs) in Chinese in both the adnominal and predicate positions (Huang, 1997, Some remarks on adjectives in Mandarin Chinese. Paper delivered at the International Association of Chinese Linguistics-6 (IACL-6), Leiden, June 19--21, 1997, The Netherlands; Shen, 1997, Zhongguo Yuwen, 259, 242--250; Zhu, 1956, Xiandai Hanyu Xingrongci Yanjiu [Studies of adjectives in modern Chinese]. Yuyan Yanjiu 1. Also published in Zhu Dexi (1980) Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Yanjiu [Grammatical studies of modern Chinese], pp. 3--41). This article makes two major claims: (a) there are two subgroups of CAs; while one is in total complementary distribution with SAs, the other is in partial complementary distribution with SAs; and (b) the total/partial complementary distribution noted in (a) can be explained by a property- theoretic conjunction/intersection analysis of modification structures which ensures not only type matching but also sortal matching between the modifier and modifiee. Evidence from dialectal studies (Zhu, 1993, Fangyan, 2, 81--100) is provided as strong support for this hypothesis.}, Author = {Huang, Shi-Zhe}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:32:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:33:56 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {4}, Pages = {343--369}, Title = {Property Theory, Adjectives, and Modification in {C}hinese}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2006}} @article{Tenny:2006, Abstract = {This paper examines some phenomena in Japanese related to predicates of direct experience, which seem to require an integration of speech act, first and second person, evidentiality, and long distance binding. These predicates restrict their experiencer subjects to first person in the declarative and second person in the interrogative; the restriction is lifted by clausal or lexical evidential markers; and the binding domain for the long-distance anaphor jibun is the same as the evidential domains that lift the person constraint. Most of these facts are not new in the literature, but this proposal to integrate these facts under one general account at the syntax/semantics/discourse interface is new. The paper proposes an integrated account of these facts in the context of a framework for a Syntax of Sentience, which includes sentience roles, functional projections relating to sentience, and morphosyntactic features encoding sentience properties. Each of these separate parts of the proposal arises independently out of a different thread of research. The fact that the syntax of sentience outlined here integrates such a range of facts and literatures is seen as a strength of the approach.}, Author = {Tenny, Carol L.}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:29:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:31:43 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {245--288}, Title = {Evidentiality, Experiencers, and the Syntax of Sentience in {J}apanese}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2006}} @article{Ko:2006, Abstract = {This paper discusses various puzzles concerning the phonology of Korean nominal inflection. In particular, I investigate a range of vowel hiatus resolution phenomena that differ between nouns and verbs, the overapplication of consonant cluster simplification and laryngeal feature neutralization in nominal stems, and certain asymmetries between derived nouns and nonderived nouns. After presenting some problems with previous approaches, I offer an analysis of the phonology of Korean nominal inflection in terms of BASE-OUTPUT CORRESPONDENCE (BOC) THEORY, along the lines of Kager (1999). I argue that a variety of unexpected properties of noun phonology in Korean can receive a unified account under the BOC approach. I also show that noun-specific alignment and noun-specific faithfulness constraints are inadequate to capture noun phonology in Korean. My arguments support the view that the fact that nouns have a Base (isolation form) is the key factor in explaining the unique properties of noun phonology (see Kenstowicz's (1996) BASE IDENTITY, in particular). It is shown, however, that the BOC approach overcomes shortcomings with the Base Identity approach by making a necessary distinction between minor and fatal divergence from the Base.}, Author = {Ko, Heejeong}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:28:08 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:29:16 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {195--243}, Title = {Base-Output Correspondence in {K}orean Nominal Inflection}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2006}} @book{Keskin:2009, Author = {Keskin, Cem}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:24:14 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:25:29 -0500}, Publisher = {LOT}, Title = {Subject Agreement-Dependency of {A}ccusative {C}ase in {T}urkish}, Year = {2009}} @article{Seiler:2009, Author = {Seiler, Guido}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:21:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:23:03 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {229--272}, Title = {Sound change or analogy? {M}onosyllabic lengthening in {G}erman and some of its consequences}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Bader:2009, Abstract = {Although verb cluster formation has long been a topic of syntactic research, many of its properties are still controversial. In this paper, we contribute to the ongoing discussion by looking at verb order variation in 3- and 4-verb clusters in German on the basis of new empirical evidence. First, we present several experiments that have used the method of speeded grammaticality judgments in order to determine the orders within a verb cluster that are accepted by native speakers. A major result of our experiments is that native speakers accept more orders than are allowed in Standard German. Second, we give a theoretical account of the data which applies and extends Williams' (2003) CAT-language. We show how the variation between Standard German and the more liberal Colloquial German that was revealed in our experiments follows from slightly different lexical entries within this system. Standard German is characterized by a complexity requirement on modal verb complements that restricts verb order variation. The more liberal Colloquial German system lacks this feature and thus allows a larger variation of verb orders.}, Author = {Bader, Markus and Schmid, Tanja}, Date-Added = {2009-12-29 11:19:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-29 11:20:53 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {175--228}, Title = {Verb clusters in colloquial {G}erman}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @book{Potts:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Potts, Christopher}, Date-Added = {2009-12-13 11:00:53 -0700}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-13 11:01:55 -0700}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The Logic of Conventional Implicatures}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{Schlenker:2005a, Author = {Schlenker, Philippe}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung}, Date-Added = {2009-12-06 19:28:40 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-01-22 16:52:36 -0500}, Editor = {Maier, Emar and Bary, Corien and Huitink, Janneke}, Pages = {385--416}, Title = {Minimize Restrictors! (Notes on Definite Descriptions, Condition {C} and Epithets)}, Volume = {9}, Year = {2005}} @article{Schlenker:2005, Author = {Schlenker, Philippe}, Date-Added = {2009-12-06 19:27:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-12-07 09:32:34 -0500}, Journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--92}, Title = {Non-Redundancy: Towards A Semantic Reinterpretation of {B}inding {T}heory}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2005}} @inproceedings{Sprouse:2005, Author = {Sprouse, Jon}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the thirty-sixth annual meeting of the {N}orth {E}ast {L}ingusitic {S}ociety}, Date-Added = {2009-11-30 11:00:24 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-30 11:15:16 -0500}, Editor = {Davis, Christopher and Deal, Amy Rose and Zabbal, Youri}, Pages = {546--559}, Publisher = {{GLSA}}, Title = {{ACD} and Movement Reconsidered: {A} and {A$'$} Copies}, Volume = {Two}, Year = {2005}} @book{Kehler:2002, Address = {Stanford University}, Author = {Kehler, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2009-11-30 08:28:18 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-30 08:28:56 -0500}, Publisher = {{CSLI} Publications}, Title = {Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar}, Year = {2002}} @article{Kehler:2000, Author = {Kehler, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2009-11-30 08:27:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-30 08:27:54 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Number = {533--575}, Title = {Coherence and the resolution of ellipsis}, Year = {2000}} @article{Fodor:1982, Author = {Fodor, Janet Dean and Sag, Ivan}, Date-Added = {2009-11-17 12:01:53 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-17 12:02:54 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Pages = {355--398}, Title = {Referential and Quantificational Indefinites}, Volume = {5}, Year = {1982}} @article{Ochi:2009, Abstract = {This paper argues that the DP object in Japanese always moves to the domain of vP in overt syntax. The main argument for this hypothesis comes from the transitivity restriction imposed on the genitive-subject construction in this language. I argue that once the object is shifted to the edge of vP, the subject in the inner specifier of vP is rendered inaccessible from the higher phase head. This hypothesis also derives the well-known ban on multiple occurrences of accusative phrases in the Japanese causative construction. The paper also makes several theoretical points. For instance, the EPP checking (in the traditional sense) is contingent on an independent Agree relation such as Case checking. Also, calculation of equidistance is confined to a very local domain of a syntactic derivation.}, Author = {Ochi, Masao}, Date-Added = {2009-11-11 12:34:01 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-11 12:34:40 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {324--362}, Title = {Overt Object Shift in {J}apanese}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Deal:2009, Abstract = {While expletive there has primarily been studied in the context of the existential construction, it has long been known that some but not all lexical verbs are compatible with there insertion. This paper argues that there insertion can be used to diagnose vPs with no external argument, ruling out transitives, unergatives, and also inchoatives, which are argued to project an event argument on the edge of vP. Based on the tight link between there insertion and low functional structure, I build a case for low there insertion, where the expletive is first merged in the specifier of a verbalizing head v. The low merge position is motivated by a stringently local relationship that holds between there and its associate DP; this relationship plays a crucial role in the interaction of there with raising verbs, where local agreement rules out cases of ``too many theres'' such as *There seemed there to be a man in the room. An account of these cases in terms of phase theory is explored, in which I ultimately suggest that there must be merged in a nonthematic phasal specifier position.}, Author = {Deal, Amy Rose}, Date-Added = {2009-11-11 12:31:15 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-11 12:32:08 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {4}, Pages = {285--323}, Title = {The Origin and Content of Expletives: Evidence from ``Selection''}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Trapman:2009, Abstract = {Can second language (L2) learners acquire a grammar that allows a subset of the structures allowed by their native grammar? This question is addressed here with respect to acquisition of phonotactics. On the assumption that the L2 initial state equals the native grammar's final state, learnability theory would predict that a lack of negative evidence for phonotactic structures that are illegal in the target language precludes acquisition of the target grammar. This prediction is tested for L1-Russian (superset) and L1-Spanish (subset) L2 learners of Dutch by means of word-likeness judgments and lexical decision experiments. Participants responded to nonwords containing consonant clusters in onsets and codas that are legal (1) only in Russian, (2) only in Russian and Dutch, or (3) in all three languages. The results converge to show that advanced L1-Russian and L1-Spanish L2 learners possess native-like phonotactic knowledge. Analysis shows that this knowledge cannot be attributed to transfer of lexical statistics from the native language. The results suggest that L2 phonotactic acquisition is not affected by subset/superset relations between the native language and target language. Some possible explanations for our findings are discussed.}, Author = {Trapman, Mirjam and Kager, Ren{\'e}}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:31:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:32:56 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {178--221}, Title = {The Acquisition of Subset and Superset Phonotactic Knowledge in a Second Language}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Marsden:2009, Abstract = {This article reports on an experimental investigation of knowledge of distributivity in nonnative (L2) Japanese learners whose first language (L1) is English or Korean. The availability of distributive scope in Japanese is modulated by word order and the semantic features of quantifiers. For English- speaking learners, these subtle interpretive phenomena are underdetermined in both the input and the L1. However, for Korean speakers, target-like knowledge could arise via L1 transfer. The results yield clear evidence of distinct developmental paths in the two L1 groups, testifying to L1 influence on the syntax-semantics interface. Nonetheless, some English-speaking learners exhibit target-like distributive readings despite the lack of direct evidence. This development of target-like knowledge in the absence of evidence is accounted for by integrating Sprouse's (2006) lexical transfer account of L2 acquisition and a Universal Grammar model (Beghelli 1995) of distributive scope.}, Author = {Marsden, Heather}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:29:25 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:30:43 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {135--177}, Title = {Distributive Quantifier Scope in {E}nglish-{J}apanese and {K}orean-{J}apanese Interlanguage}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Becker:2009, Abstract = {I describe the results of an experiment that bears on how children learn the lexical and syntactic properties of abstract verbs (seem, try) in order to distinguish the subclasses of raising (seem) and control verbs (try). Previous research suggested that an inanimate subject in certain contexts leads children to suppose that the subject and main verb are not thematically related, and thus that the verb is a raising verb. Here I address two alternative possibilities. One possibility is that children lack the adult-like restriction that subject and verb must match in animacy, which I counter with evidence from the developmental literature. The other possibility, addressed by the experiment, is that children's control verbs are thematically related to their subject but do not require the subject to be animate. I will argue, instead, that the presence of an expletive/inanimate subject coerces a raising analysis of the verb, and concomitant ``bleached'' semantics of the verb in that context.}, Author = {Becker, Misha}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:27:05 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:27:57 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {283--296}, Title = {The Role of {NP} Animacy and Expletives in Verb Learning}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Notley:2009, Abstract = {Children often produce nonadult responses to sentences with the focus operator only, such as Only the cat is holding a flag. For example, children often accept this sentence as a description of a situation in which a cat holds a flag and a duck holds both a flag and a balloon. One proposed analysis, by Paterson, Liversedge, Rowland & Filik (2003), contends that children disregard only in such sentences, yielding The cat is holding a flag. An alternative proposal by Crain, Ni & Conway (1994) maintains that children misassign only to the VP, yielding The cat is only holding a flag. The findings of experimental studies with two typologically distinct languages, English and Mandarin Chinese, support Crain et al.'s (1994) analysis. We propose, further, that children pass through a stage at which only is analyzed as a sentential adverb taking scope over both the subject NP and the VP. We address the questions of why children initially adopt this analysis, and how they converge on the adult grammars of these languages.}, Author = {Notley, Anna and Zhou, Peng and Crain, Stephen and Thornton, Rosalind}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:24:49 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:26:51 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {240--282}, Title = {Children's Interpretation of Focus Expressions in {E}nglish and {M}andarin}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{De-Cat:2009, Abstract = {This study investigates the acquisition of the discourse/pragmatic notion of topic, based on an experimental task eliciting topic vs. focus subjects. In spoken French, these are obligatorily realized as dislocated vs. nondislocated noun phrases. The results provide overwhelming evidence for the early mastery of topic, even by the youngest children (2;6). The only difficulty was in the evaluation of fine-grained salience distinctions, leading to the underuse of full noun phrases in ambiguous contexts. A theory of mind test revealed that the ability to assess their listener's knowledge state is not sufficient to explain this underuse. Instead, children's overreliance on the situational context as a source of complementary information to disambiguate their utterances is argued to have a major impact on how explicit they are.}, Author = {De Cat, C{\'e}cile}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:22:41 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:23:54 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {224--239}, Title = {Experimental Evidence for Preschoolers' Mastery of ``Topic''}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Sichel:2009, Author = {Sichel, Ivy}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:17:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:19:37 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {712--723}, Title = {New Evidence for the Structural Realization of the Implicit External Argument in Nominalizations}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kornai:2009, Author = {Kornai, Andr{\'a}s}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:16:11 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:17:51 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {701--712}, Title = {The Complexity of Phonology}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Williams:2009, Abstract = {According to Kratzer (2003), the thematic relation Theme, construed very generally, is not a ``natural relation.'' She says that the ``natural relations'' are ``cumulative'' and argues that Theme is not cumulative, in contrast to Agent. It is therefore best, she concludes, to remove Theme from the palette of semantic analysis. Here I oppose the premises of Kratzer's argument and then introduce a new challenge to her conclusion, based on the resultative construction in Mandarin. The facts show that Theme and Agent are on equal footing, insofar as neither has the property that Kratzer's conjecture requires of a natural relation.}, Author = {Williams, Alexander}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:14:11 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:15:58 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {686--700}, Title = {Themes, Cumulativity, and Resultatives: comments on Kratzer 2003}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Boersma:2009, Abstract = {This article shows that Error-Driven Constraint Demotion (EDCD), an error-driven learning algorithm proposed by Tesar (1995) for Prince and Smolensky's (1993/2004) version of Optimality Theory, can fail to converge to a correct totally ranked hierarchy of constraints, unlike the earlier non-error-driven learning algorithms proposed by Tesar and Smolensky (1993). The cause of the problem is found in Tesar's use of ``mark-pooling ties,'' indicating that EDCD can be repaired by assuming Anttila's (1997) ``permuting ties'' instead. Proofs show, and simulations confirm, that totally ranked hierarchies can indeed be found by both this repaired version of EDCD and Boersma's (1998) Minimal Gradual Learning Algorithm.}, Author = {Boersma, Paul}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:12:12 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:13:52 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {667--686}, Title = {Some Correct Error-Driven Versions of the Constraint Demotion Algorithm}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Preminger:2009, Abstract = {In this article, I propose a novel way to distinguish between agreement and clitic doubling. The innovation lies in examining what happens when the relation between the relevant agreement morphology and the full noun phrase fails to obtain: whether the agreement morpheme still shows up, bearing default phi-features, or disappears altogether. The workings of the proposed diagnostic are demonstrated using a family of constructions in ``substandard'' Basque (Etxepare 2006). Besides supporting the proposed diagnostic, the analysis of Basque provides a new perspective on the typological status of the Basque agreement system, as well as evidence against the traditional analysis of unergatives in Basque as being underlyingly transitive.}, Author = {Preminger, Omer}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:10:18 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:11:30 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {619--666}, Title = {Breaking Agreements: Distinguishing Agreement and Clitic Doubling by Their Failures}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kim:2009b, Abstract = {This article examines glottalization and lenition in Nuu-chah-nulth. These processes involve features introduced via affixation, features that are sometimes compatible with the final segment of the stem and sometimes incompatible. An understanding of the intricacies of these patterns requires a focus on featural representations, with lexical representations involving floating features and variable specifications for features. Both of these properties follow from the postulation of a rich base, with features freely combining in inputs. The analysis argues for covert features, for constraints holding more strongly in small domains than large domains, and for the importance of a markedness scale on glottalizability.}, Author = {Kim, Eun-Sook and Pulleyblank, Douglas}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:08:25 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:10:07 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {567--617}, Title = {Glottalization and Lenition in {N}uu-chah-nulth}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hicks:2009, Abstract = {This article addresses the syntax of the notorious tough(-movement) construction (TC) in English. TCs exhibit a range of apparently contra- dictory empirical properties suggesting that their derivation involves the application of both A-movement and A'-movement operations. Within previous principles-and-parameters models, TCs have remained ``unexplained and in principle unexplainable'' (Holmberg 2000:839) because of incompatibility with constraints on theta-role assignment, locality, and Case. This article argues that the phase-based implementation of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 2000, 2001, 2004) permits a reanalysis of null wh-operators capable of circumventing the previous theoretical difficulties. Essentially, tough-movement consists of A-moving a constituent out of a ``complex'' null operator that has already undergone A'-movement, a ``smuggling'' construction in the terms proposed by Collins (2005a,b).}, Author = {Hicks, Glyn}, Date-Added = {2009-11-05 08:05:07 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-11-05 08:08:11 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {535--566}, Title = {Tough-Constructions and Their Derivation}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @periodical{Ott:2009, Abstract = {This paper presents a novel analysis of the phenomenon of stylistic fronting in Icelandic. It is argued that stylistic fronting is not a head-movement operation, but rather phrasal movement to subject position In many cases, however, independent factors deterine evacuation of the phrase prior to raising, i.e., the fronted phrase can be a remnant. It is shown that this approach can account for a variety of otherwise puzzling properties of stylistic fronting.}, Author = {Ott, Dennis}, Date-Added = {2009-10-12 10:51:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-12 10:52:07 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {141--178}, Title = {Styistic fronting as remnant movement}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2009}} @periodical{Hroarsdottir:2009a, Author = {Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir, Thorbj{\"o}rg}, Date-Added = {2009-10-12 10:50:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-12 10:51:16 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {103--140}, Title = {Notes on language change and grammar change}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2009}} @periodical{Engels:2009, Abstract = {In the Scandinavian langauge, sentential negation must be licensed outside VP, necessitating leftward movement of negative objects, ``Negative Shift'' (NegS). While string-vacuous NegS is possibel in all Scandinavian varieties, there is a fair amount of cross-linguistic variation as to non-string vacuous NegS. In particlar, the varieties contrast in which constituents can be corssed by NegS and whether or not crossing of a certain constituent requires the presence of an intervening verb. The paper discusses which difficulties for syntactic analysis arise from the variation as to the applicability of NegS and why other movement operatios do not display such a range of variation.}, Author = {Engels, Eva}, Date-Added = {2009-10-12 10:47:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-12 10:47:57 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {83--102}, Title = {Microvaration in object positions: {N}egative {S}hift in {S}candinavian}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2009}} @periodical{Hroarsdottir:2009, Abstract = {Older Icelandic had several OV word order patterns. This article focuses on the derivaiton of word order patterns with `split' orders. The principal aim is to argue for how the parameter loss (loss ov OV) must be seen as a loss of `weak' (defective) T, leading to the loss ov FP/PredP moving to SpecCP. This accounts for the diachronic aspect in terms of one parameter change, resulting in the loss of all the various OV word order patterns at the same time in the history of Icelandic.}, Author = {Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir, Thorbj{\"o}rg}, Date-Added = {2009-10-12 10:39:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2011-03-05 13:06:03 -0500}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {37--82}, Title = {Restructuring and {OV} order}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2009}} @periodical{Wiklund:2009, Abstract = {This paper is a brief extensio of recent work on embedded verb second and is a contribution to research on the relation between V2 and illocutionary force. It presents a problem for the hypothesis that there is an illocutionary motivation for the verb second word order in Mainland Scandinavian declaratives. The relevant force, to the extent that we can identify it, appears to be available also in the absence of V2 word order.}, Author = {Wiklund, Anna-Lena}, Date-Added = {2009-10-12 10:38:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-12 10:39:36 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {27--36}, Title = {In search of the force of dependent {V2}: A note on {S}wedish}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2009}} @periodical{Stroh-Wollin:2009, Abstract = {This paper deals with the development of three different definiteness markers in Old Scandinavian: the definite suffice -inn and the pre-adjectival articles (h)inn and s{\'a}{\th}en. It is argued that only the development of the definite suffix followed the normal path of grammaticalization of definite articles. Fromt eh earliest Scandinavian texts, the runic inscriptions, follows that the future articles (h)inn and s{\a}{\th}en started as formal elements preceding weakly inflected adjectives. They appear in this function very early, and, seemingly, more or less obligatorily so from the beginning. On this ground, earlier analyses of the definite markers and the noun phrase in Old Norse are rejected. Further, the role of the regional variation in Scanidnavia is highlighted in relation to the competition between the two free articles.}, Author = {Stroh-Wollin, Ulla}, Date-Added = {2009-10-12 10:37:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-12 10:41:14 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {1--25}, Title = {On the development of definiteness markers in {S}candinavian}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2009}} @article{Wiese:2009, Abstract = {This paper discusses varieties of German with respect to noun pluralisation, with a focus on the status of final plural schwa as in Fisch-e `fish, pl.'. By analysing the much-discussed plural morphology of Standard German by means of both prosodic as well as morphological principles, it is argued that final schwa in plural nouns of Standard German is not, as generally assumed, an inflectional suffix. As an alternative, an optimality-theoretic constraint-based analysis of final schwa in plurals leads to the proposal that this segment in noun plurals of Standard German arises as an inserted vowel, which is in turn the result of a specific constraint interaction. In the second part of this paper, related noun plurals are studied in a sample of diverse non-standard dialects of German. Morphological and prosodic constraints, through the well-known mechanism of differences in constraint-ranking in Optimality Theory, derive the (non-)appearance of word-final plural schwas in these dialects which are minimally different from Standard German and from each other. The constraints will include those which refer to properties of whole paradigms of word forms, not just to phonological properties of individual words. As an overall descriptive result, a micro-typology of plural formation in varieties of German emerges, and the prosodic phonology of German is demonstrated to play a crucial role in the formation of word forms.}, Author = {Wiese, Richard}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:47:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:48:26 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {137--173}, Title = {The grammar and typology of plural noun inflection in varieties of {G}erman}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Meinunger:2009, Abstract = {In this contribution, I investigate the leftmost periphery of German CPs and DPs and try to give a unified account for some grammatical phenomena concerning the (non-) integration of orphan-like elements. It will be shown that in both cases, certain speaker-oriented adverbials or adjectives pattern much alike. They may be placed in a quasi-external position, in which they can be considered syntactic orphans. In particular, the adjectival construction has not really been discussed in the literature. Both---the investigated adverbials and adjectives---can also appear inside a clause (prefield) or within the noun phrase (i.e., between article and noun). The two relevant positions are associated with specific restrictions on the available readings. A possible explanation of these restrictions will be proposed. The results of the given analysis have some consequences for the architecture of the so-called interfaces, that is, the bridge character of the branch from core syntax to the morpho-phonological component on the one hand (PF in the broad sense), and the one between syntax proper and meaning (LF in a larger view) on the other.}, Author = {Meinunger, Andr{\'e}}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:44:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:46:20 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {115--135}, Title = {Leftmost peripheral adverbs and adjectives in {G}erman}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Breitbarth:2009, Abstract = {The goal of this paper is to propose an alternative interpretation of the diachronic development of the expression of negation known as Jespersen's cycle as it is found in the West Germanic languages. Research to date has focussed mainly on the conditions behind the rise of the secondary negator. Much less attention has been paid to the fate of the original marker. The present paper focuses on the development of the original negation particle in the West Germanic languages English, Dutch, and High and Low German and argues that at least in these languages, its weakening and reinforcement are related in a more complex way than is usually assumed and that functional redundancy due to the presence of two negation elements is not likely to be the reason for its loss. Rather, a shift in the licensing conditions of n-indefinites created a potential ambiguity of the original marker which fed into its reanalysis as a polarity marker at exactly the point when a new marker became available, by reanalysis of a previously and independently grammaticalised reinforcer. It is argued that the two reanalyses have to occur simultaneously, resulting in a hybrid approach to Jespersen's cycle in West Germanic, as opposed to previous approaches under which one of the changes conditions the other.}, Author = {Breitbarth, Anne}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:41:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:43:21 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {81--114}, Title = {A hybrid approach to {J}espersen's cycle in {W}est {G}ermanic}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Soh:2009, Abstract = {This paper addresses the connection between the ``change of state'' and the ``contrary to expectation'' interpretations through a study of Mandarin sentence-final particle -le (sentential -le), which along with English already and German schon are associated with these two interpretations. Making use of the notion of speaker presupposition and common ground (Stalnaker 1998, 1999, 2002), I propose an analysis of sentential -le whereby the ``change of state'' interpretation is associated with a change expressed by propositions within a common ground, while the ``contrary to expectation'' interpretation is associated with a change expressed by propositions across common grounds. Contrary to what is sometimes assumed, both the ``change of state'' and the ``contrary to expectation'' interpretations involve changes across a temporal domain. The proposal is supported by a restriction in the occurrence of sentential -le with downward-entailing quantifiers. The analysis supports L{\"o}bner's (1989) insight that already/schon is associated with a presupposition about a prior ``negative state'', and clarifies how the ``change of state'' associated with sentential -le is different from the one entailed by the occurrence of a telic situation.}, Author = {Soh, Hooi Ling}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:07:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:09:47 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {623--657}, Title = {Speaker presupposition and {M}andarin {C}hinese sentence-final \emph{-le}: a unified analysis of ``change of state'' and the ``contrary to expectation'' reading}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Gecseg:2009, Abstract = {It is a commonly accepted view in the Hungarian linguistic literature that sentence structure is determined by information structure, viewed as a phrase structure theoretic interpretation of the topic--comment articulation of the sentence. There is a designated topic position at the left edge of the sentence, namely SpecTopP, hosting constituents that are claimed to be in a predicative relation with the rest of the sentence. On this view, topic--comment and logical subject--logical predicate are con- sidered to be synonymous notions. We argue that the notion of topic as used in the Hungarian literature poses some serious problems, which can only be eliminated if the pragmatic aspects of topichood are separated from its semantic function entailing the development of a two-level approach to information structure. Topic and logical subject belong to two different levels with topic being an essentially pragmatic no- tion and logical subject being a syntactico-semantic notion. On this analysis the basic syntactic structure of the Hungarian sentence is determined by the articulation ``logical subject--logical predicate'' rather than by the articulation ``topic-comment''. The proposed analysis has important typological consequences.}, Author = {G{\'e}cseg, Zsuzsanna and Kiefer, Ferenc}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:04:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:06:59 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {583--622}, Title = {A new look at information structure in {H}ungarian}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Gallagher:2009, Abstract = {This paper argues that long-distance assimilations between consonants come in two varieties: Total identity, which arises via a non-local relation between the interacting segments; and partial identity, which results from local articulatory spreading through intervening segments (Flemming 1995; Gafos 1999). Our proposal differs from previous analyses (Hansson 2001; Rose and Walker 2004) in that only total identity is a non-local phenomenon. While non-adjacent consonants may interact via a relation we call linking, the only requirement which may be placed on linked consonants is total identity. All single feature identities are the result of local spreading. The interaction of a total identity requirement on ejectives and stri- dents with anteriority harmony in Chol (Mayan) highlights the distinction between these two types of long-distance phenomena. We show that theories that allow non- local, single-feature agreement make undesirable predictions, and that the more restrictive typology predicted by our framework is supported by the vast majority of long-distance assimilation cases.}, Author = {Gallagher, Gillian and Coon, Jessica}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:02:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:04:39 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {545--582}, Title = {Distinguishing total and partial identity: Evidence from {C}hol}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Ernst:2009, Abstract = {This paper presents an analysis of the ordering of speaker-oriented adverbs (SpOAs) with respect to each other and negation, arguing that SpOAs are positive polarity items, and therefore normally cannot follow negation. The adverbs represent a speaker's subjective commitment to the truth of the proposition represented by the adverb, which is incompatible with the falsity of the same proposition required by nega- tion. This also accounts for the usual unacceptability of SpOAs in other contexts, such as questions and conditionals. The analysis extends to other contexts where SpOAs are acceptable, such as negative questions and negative counterfactual conditionals, in such a way as to contribute support for Giannakidou's (non)veridical theory of polarity over ``strengthening'' theories based on scalar implicatures. It is also shown that SpOAs' underlying semantic property of being subjective also helps predict their linear order with respect to each other.}, Author = {Ernst, Thomas}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 09:00:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 09:01:15 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {497--544}, Title = {Speaker-oriented adverbs}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Boskovic:2009, Abstract = {The paper investigates first and last conjunct agreement in Serbo-Croatian, the latter being a rather rare phenomenon for head initial languages. The paper gives a uniform account of first and last conjunct agreement based on the operation Agree (Chomsky 2000). The account captures both the contexts where first and last conjunct agreement exhibit parallel behavior and the contexts where the parallelism between the two breaks down. The analysis also captures interaction between gender and num- ber agreement. Given the complexity of the first/last conjunct agreement paradigm in Serbo-Croatian, to the extent that it is successful the analysis presented in the paper provides strong evidence in favor of the operation Agree in general, as well as the particular approach to Agree adopted in the paper. The system developed in the paper allows one instance of uninterpretable features, namely valued uninterpretable fea- tures, not to undergo feature checking and does not require uninterpretable features in general to undergo feature checking with interpretable features, differing in these respects from Chomsky (2000, 2001a) and Pesetsky and Torrego (2007).}, Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko}, Date-Added = {2009-10-01 08:57:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-10-01 08:58:15 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {455--496}, Title = {Unifying first and last conjunct agreement}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @incollection{Beghelli:1997, Author = {Beghelli, Filippo and Stowell, Timothy}, Booktitle = {Ways of Taking Scope}, Date-Added = {2009-09-30 21:52:09 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-30 21:53:29 -0400}, Editor = {Szabolcsi, Anna}, Pages = {71--107}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Title = {Distributivity and Negation: The Syntax of \emph{each} and \emph{every}}, Year = {1997}} @phdthesis{Tunstall:1998, Address = {Amherst, Massachusetts}, Author = {Tunstall, Susanne}, Date-Added = {2009-09-30 21:50:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-30 21:51:20 -0400}, School = {University of Massachusetts at Amherst}, Title = {The Interpretation of Quantifiers: Semantics and Processing}, Year = {1998}} @inproceedings{Swart:1992, Author = {de Swart, Helen}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of {SALT II}}, Date-Added = {2009-09-24 10:22:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-24 10:24:06 -0400}, Pages = {387--402}, Title = {Intervention Effects. Monotonicity and Scope}, Year = {1992}} @incollection{Stechow:1996a, Address = {Dordrecht}, Author = {von Stechow, Arnim}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the {K}onstanz Workshop ``Reference and Anaphorical Relations''}, Date-Added = {2009-09-17 08:39:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-17 08:44:02 -0400}, Editor = {von Heusinger, Klaus and Egli, Urs}, Pages = {193--228}, Publisher = {Kluwer Publications}, Title = {Some remarks on choice functions and {LF}-movement}, Year = {2000}} @unpublished{Takahashi:2007, Author = {Takahashi, Shoichi}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 12:30:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 12:33:40 -0400}, Note = {unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts at Amherst}, Title = {On Traces and Copies}, Year = {2007}} @article{Takahashi:2009a, Author = {Takahashi, Shoichi}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 12:28:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 12:29:23 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Title = {The Hidden Side of Clausal Complements}, Year = {to appear}} @phdthesis{Cable:2007, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Cable, Seth}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 11:18:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 11:19:53 -0400}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {The Grammar of {Q}: {Q}-Particles and the Nature of Wh-Fronting, as Revealed by the Wh-Questions of {T}lingit}, Year = {2007}} @book{Heck:2008, Author = {Heck, Fabian}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 11:16:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 11:16:37 -0400}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Title = {A Theory of Pied-Piping}, Year = {2008}} @unpublished{Cable:2008, Author = {Cable, Seth}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 11:08:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 11:09:29 -0400}, Note = {unpublished paper, University of Massachusetts at Amherst}, Title = {There is No Such Thing as Pied-Piping}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Rett:2006, Author = {Rett, Jessica}, Booktitle = {Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 6}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 10:25:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 10:26:28 -0400}, Editor = {Bonami, Olivier and Hofherr, P. Cabredo}, Pages = {355--374}, Publisher = {CNRS}, Title = {Pronominal vs. determiner \emph{wh}-words: evidence from the copy construction}, Year = {2006}} @article{Liptak:2007a, Author = {Lipt{\'a}k, Anik{\'o} and Vicente, Luis}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 10:21:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 10:21:39 -0400}, Journal = {Lingua}, Title = {Pronominal doubling under predicate topicalization}, Year = {2007}} @incollection{Kuno:2004, Author = {Kuno, Susumu}, Booktitle = {The Handbook of Pragmatics}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 09:32:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 09:35:19 -0400}, Editor = {Horn, Laurence R. and Ward, Gregory}, Pages = {315--343}, Publisher = {Blackwell Publishing}, Title = {Empathy and Direct Discourse Perspectives}, Year = {2004}} @phdthesis{Moulton:2009, Author = {Moulton, Keir}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 09:24:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 09:25:08 -0400}, School = {University of Massachusetts at Amherst}, Title = {Natural Selection and the Syntax of Clausal Complementation}, Year = {2009}} @inproceedings{Kluck:2007, Author = {Kluck, Marlies}, Booktitle = {CamLing 2007}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 08:51:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 08:53:00 -0400}, Pages = {130--137}, Title = {The perspective of external remerge on {R}ight {N}ode {R}aising}, Year = {2007}} @phdthesis{Yuksek:2007, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Yuksek, Martina}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 08:10:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 08:11:31 -0400}, School = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology}, Title = {About Sharing}, Year = {2007}} @unpublished{Vries:2006b, Author = {de Vries, Mark}, Date-Added = {2009-09-09 08:06:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 08:09:20 -0400}, Note = {unpublished paper, University of Groeningen}, Title = {Asymmetric Merge and Parataxis}, Year = {2006}} @inproceedings{Guilliot:2006, Address = {Somerville, Massachusetts}, Author = {Guilliot, Nicolas and Malkawi, Nouman}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics}, Date-Added = {2009-09-08 17:35:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-08 17:37:08 -0400}, Editor = {Baumer, Donald and Montero, David and Scanlon, Michael}, Pages = {168--176}, Publisher = {Cascadilla Press}, Title = {When Resumption Determines Reconstruction}, Year = {2006}} @incollection{Malkawi:2007, Author = {Malkawi, Nouman and Guilliot, Nicolas}, Booktitle = {Perspectives on {A}rabic {L}inguistics XX}, Date-Added = {2009-09-08 17:32:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2012-01-25 15:58:55 +0000}, Editor = {Mughazy, M.}, Publisher = {John Benjamins}, Title = {Reconstruction and Islandhood in {J}ordanian {A}rabic}, Year = {2007}} @book{Lutz:2000, Date-Added = {2009-09-07 17:28:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-07 17:29:45 -0400}, Editor = {Lutz, Uli and M{\"u}ller, Gereon and von Stechow, Arnim}, Publisher = {Linguistik Aktuell}, Title = {Wh-Scope Marking}, Year = {2000}} @incollection{Carnie:2006, Author = {Carnie, Andrew and Cash Cash, Phillip}, Booktitle = {Ergativity}, Date-Added = {2009-08-31 13:26:21 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-31 13:52:34 -0400}, Editor = {Johns, Alana and Massam, Diane and Ndayiragije, Juv{\'e}nal}, Pages = {229--244}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {Tree-geometric relational hierarchies and {N}uumiipuut{\'\i}mt ({Nez Perce}) Case}, Year = {2006}} @article{Hinterholzl:2009, Abstract = {This paper proposes a novel phase-based approach to directionality parameters in Germanic. Basic OV and basic VO order are argued to follow from two interacting types of mapping constraints at the interfaces. The properties of event-related adjuncts are shown not to follow from a dual structure involving cascades, but are derived by (silent) scrambling of arguments and adjuncts plus vP intraposition, which serves to license event-related adjuncts as (superimposed) predicates.}, Author = {Hinterh{\"o}lzl, Roland}, Date-Added = {2009-08-28 08:29:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-28 08:30:16 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {242--284}, Title = {A Phase-Based Comparative Approach to Modification and Word Order in {G}ermanic}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Gruter:2009, Abstract = {It has traditionally been assumed that French is a non-null-object language on a par with English. Yet the analysis of adult French corpora has shown the consistent occurrence of referential null objects in speech and writing. These constructions, although clearly marked, put into question a major premise of syntactic analyses of object-clitic constructions---namely, that sentences referring to a specific, referential object but lacking both a clitic and a postverbal object are necessarily ungrammatical. The goal of this paper is to present a revised analysis of object-clitic constructions that is capable of integrating referential null objects. It is proposed that the zero morpheme constitutes the default realization of the accusative clitic head and is inserted if this head is underspecified for Case. The analysis extends naturally to account for predicate le, as well as to errors observed in child language development, in particular the overuse of masculine singular le as well as object (-clitic) omission. It is proposed that the syntactic representation underlying clitic drop in child and adult French is identical, yet child and adult French differ with regard to the reason for the underspecification of the clitic head.}, Author = {Gr{\"u}ter, Theres}, Date-Added = {2009-08-28 08:26:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-28 08:27:31 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {215--241}, Title = {A Unified Account of Object Clitics and Referential Null Objects in {F}rench}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Beck:2009f, Abstract = {The central claim of this paper is that the use of the adverb again has changed between 19th-century English and present-day English. In particular, restitutive uses were more easily and generally available in the 19th century than they are now. This diachronic change provides evidence for a lexical parameter governing the behavior of adverbs at the syntax/semantics interface. The parameter relates surface form to possible interpretations and thus introduces an interesting notion of visibility into linguistic theory.}, Author = {Beck, Sigrid and Berezovskaya, Polina and Pflugfelder, Katja}, Date-Added = {2009-08-28 08:22:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-28 08:25:19 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {193--214}, Title = {The Use of {\emph{Again}} in 19th-Century {E}nglish versus Presen-Day {E}nglish}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Truswell:2009, Author = {Truswell, Robert}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 14:02:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 14:03:57 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {525--533}, Title = {Attributive Adjectives and Nominal Templates}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Neeleman:2009, Author = {Neeleman, Ad and Titov, Elena}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 14:01:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 14:02:11 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {514--524}, Title = {Focus, Contrast, and Stress in {R}ussian}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Haugen:2009, Author = {Haugen, Jason D.}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 13:59:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 14:00:56 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {505--514}, Title = {What is the Base for Reduplication?}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Wu:2009, Abstract = {Cheng and Sybesma (1999, 2005) argue that classifiers in Chinese are equivalent to a definite article. We argue against this position on empirical grounds, drawing attention to the fact that semantically, syntactically, and functionally, Chinese classifiers are not on the same footing as definite determiners. We also show that compared with Cheng and Sybesma's ClP analysis of Chinese NPs (in particular, Cantonese NPs, on which their proposal crucially relies), a consistent DP analysis is not only fully justified but strongly supported.}, Author = {Wu, Yicheng and Bodomo, Adams}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 13:55:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 13:58:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {487--503}, Title = {Classifiers $\neq$ Determiners}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Conroy:2009a, Abstract = {Children have repeatedly been found to exhibit Principle B violations, with some reports that these violations occur only with nonquantified antecedents. This quantificational asymmetry (QA) in the delay of Principle B effect (DPBE) has been taken as support for a theory that restricts the scope of binding theory to bound variable anaphora (Reinhart 1983). However, the QA has been challenged, on the basis of discrepant findings and methodological concerns (Elbourne 2005). Here, we resolve the status of the QA with 3 studies and a review of over 30 previous studies. Using improved experimental materials, we show that children disallow local pronoun binding with both referential and quantificational antecedents when Principle B is at issue (Experiment 1), but not when Principle B is neutralized (Experiment 2). When methodological flaws are reintroduced, we replicate the QA (Experiment 3). Drawing on evidence from adult language processing, we suggest that the role of Principle B as a filter on representations during sentence understanding, in concert with pragmatic infelicities in the tasks used, accounts for the wide variability in the DPBE in the literature.}, Author = {Conroy, Anastasia and Takahashi, Eri and Lidz, Jeffrey and Phillips, Colin}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 13:52:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 13:54:50 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {446--486}, Title = {Equal Treatment for All Antecedents: How Children Succeed with Principle {B}}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Bruening:2009, Abstract = {Ritter and Rosen (2005) claim that Algonquian languages lack A-movement and A-binding, and they theorize that all agreement in Algonquian is agreement with A' -positions. I show that this proposal cannot be maintained, given facts of quantifier scope in Passamaquoddy. These facts require recognizing a step of A-movement to a derived A-position, comparable to Spec,TP in languages like English. I further contrast this movement with the movement involved in crossclausal agreement (Branigan and MacKenzie 2002) and show that the two differ in exactly the ways that A-movement and A'-movement differ. Algonquian languages clearly have A-movement as distinct from A -movement.}, Author = {Bruening, Benjamin}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 13:50:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 13:52:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {427--445}, Title = {Algonquin Languages Have A-Movement and A-Agreement}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Takahashi:2009, Abstract = {In this article, we develop a substantially expanded theory of late merger. Adopting related insights by Fox (2002), we argue that late merger is permitted whenever an output representation can be interpreted in the semantic component. A consequence of our approach is that late merger is available not only for the well-known case of adjuncts, but also for restrictors of determiners (wholesale late merger). We demonstrate that this theory can explain the different reconstruction possibilities of A-movement and A'-movement, as well as various otherwise puzzling facts about movement and ellipsis, while still maintaining the copy theory of movement.}, Author = {Takahashi, Shoichi and Hulsey, Sarah}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 13:46:44 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-09-09 09:08:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {387--426}, Title = {Wholesale Late Merger: Beyond the {A}/{A}$'$ Distinction}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kripke:2009, Abstract = {Writers on presupposition, and on the ``projection problem'' of determining the presuppositions of compound sentences from their component clauses, traditionally assign presuppositions to each clause in isolation. I argue that many presuppositional elements are anaphoric to previous discourse or contextual elements. In compound sentences, these can be other clauses of the sentence. We thus need a theory of presuppositional anaphora, analogous to the corresponding pronominal theory.}, Author = {Kripke, Saul}, Date-Added = {2009-08-02 13:43:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-08-02 13:45:17 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {367--386}, Title = {Presupposition and Anaphora: Remarks on the Formulation of the Projection Principle}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @book{Bhatt:2006a, Author = {Bhatt, Rajesh}, Date-Added = {2009-06-29 12:10:05 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-29 17:43:34 -0400}, Publisher = {Walter de Gruyter}, Title = {Covert Modality in Non-Finite Contexts}, Year = {2006}} @incollection{Bresnan:2008, Address = {Stanford University}, Author = {Bresnan, Joan and Nikitina, Tatiana}, Booktitle = {Reality Exploration and Discovery: Pattern Interaction in Language and Life}, Date-Added = {2009-06-21 12:43:16 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-21 12:44:39 -0400}, Publisher = {{CSLI} Publications}, Title = {The gradience of the dative alternation}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Bresnan:2007a, Address = {Berlin}, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Booktitle = {Roots: Linguistics in Search of its Evidential Base}, Date-Added = {2009-06-21 12:39:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-21 12:41:18 -0400}, Editor = {Featherston, Sam and Sternefeld, Wolfgang}, Pages = {75--96}, Publisher = {Mouton de Gruyter}, Title = {Is syntactic knowledge pobabilistic? Experiments with the {E}nglish dative alternation}, Year = {2007}} @incollection{Bresnan:2007, Address = {Amsterdam}, Author = {Bresnan, Joan and Cueni, Anna and Nikitina, Tatiana and Baayen, Harald}, Booktitle = {Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation}, Date-Added = {2009-06-21 12:35:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-21 12:42:20 -0400}, Editor = {Boume, Gerlof and Kr{\"a}mer, Irene and Zwarts, Joost}, Publisher = {Royal Netherlands Academy of Science}, Title = {Predicting the dative alternation}, Year = {2007}} @article{Landau:2008a, Abstract = {The unpronounced subject of infinitives, PRO, bears standard case, which is reflected on agreeing predicative elements in languages like Russian, Icelandic, Ancient Greek, etc. This case can be independent from the case of the controller DP, or identical to it (`case transmission'). We report the findings of a novel study of case transmission in Russian, based on data collected from 30 speakers. The findings contradict some key generalizations that have gone unchallenged in the field for decades; specifically, case transmission is much more prevalent than previously assumed, often co-occurring with the option of independent case. The pattern of case transmission is determined by the interaction of a complex set of factors---the grammatical function of the controller, the shape of the complementizer, the type of control relation (exhaustive or partial), and more. The proposed analysis builds on ``The Agreement Model of Obligatory Control (OC)'' (Landau 2000, 2004, 2006) and strongly supports the claim that OC exploits two routes---either a direct Agree relation with PRO, or one mediated by the infinitival C. It is derivationally local and free of the ``look-ahead'' properties inherent to earlier accounts. Finally, we provide a description of the documented crosslinguistic variation in this domain, and situate it within a tight typological model.}, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:51:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:51:53 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {877--924}, Title = {Two routes of control: evidence from case transmission in {R}ussian}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Labelle:2008, Abstract = {It is argued that the reflexive clitic se does not operate in the lexicon in French reflexive and reciprocal constructions (excluding middles and anticausatives). The widely held approaches to reflexives, in which the reflexive clitic creates a one-place reflexive verb and/or absorbs a case feature on the verb, is both semantically inadequate and syntactically too local. The reflexive clitic appears with verbs and predicates that are independently semantically reflexive; French reflexive/reciprocal constructions are semantically transitive; and case absorption does not account for causative and applicative constructions. To account for the facts, it is proposed that se is a Voice head introducing in syntax the external argument of the verb, and stating that the referent of the object is determined on the basis of that of the subject.}, Author = {Labelle, Marie}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:50:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:50:43 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {833--876}, Title = {The {F}rench reflexive and reciprocal \emph{se}}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hiraiwa:2008, Abstract = {D{\`a}g{\'a}{\'a}r{\`e} (a Gur language) allows various patterns of predicate clefting together with object pied-piping. This article investigates interactions of Predicate Cleft Constructions (PCCs) and object-sharing Serial Verb Constructions (SVCs) in D{\`a}g{\'a}{\'a}r{\`e} and argues that the object in object-sharing SVCs is symmetrically shared. Namely, we argue, building on Citko (2005), that it is an instance of Parallel Merge. Thus we present support for Baker's (1989) insight of the Double-Headedness and against Collins' (1997) VP-shell structure with a pro. This kind of empirical evidence is not available in other languages (cf. Baker 1989, Collins 1997 among others) and hence D{\`a}g{\'a}{\'a}r{\`e} provides a novel argument for a permissible structure of object-sharing SVCs and the availability of symmetric structure in UG.}, Author = {Hiraiwa, Ken and Bodomo, Adams}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:48:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:49:19 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {795--832}, Title = {Object-sharing as {S}ymmetric {S}haring: predicate clefting and serial verbs in {D}{\`a}g{\'a}{\'a}r{\`e}}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Carstairs-McCarthy:2008, Abstract = {Among the patterns of declension exhibited by German nouns and adjectives, there are some that are traditionally labelled `weak'. It is argued here that the behaviour of `weak' noun and adjective forms can be best understood if their inflectional suffixes are regarded not as expressing morphosyntactic properties such as gender and case but rather as the outcome of conflicting ranked constraints governing what an optimal noun or adjective should look like in different contexts. For example, an attributive adjective should carry a suffix; a nominative singular form should carry no suffix; and the default inflectional affix is -en. These language-particular constraints reflect some of the `system-defining structural properties' attributed to German by the late Wolfgang Ullrich Wurzel.}, Author = {Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:46:47 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:47:28 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {775--793}, Title = {System-congruity and violable constraints in {G}erman weak declension}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Basilico:2008, Abstract = {This paper analyzes verbs that can enter into a transitive (The students wrote a lab report), benefactive double object (The students wrote their professor a lab report) and particle verb (The students wrote up a lab report) construction. The analysis is situated within the Distributed Morphology framework. It argues for the presence of a small clause structure only in the particle verb construction and not in the benefactive construction; the particle merges directly with the Root while the benefactive possessive element merges with an already categorized verb. The benefactive differs from the better researched dative in that the dative does involve a caused possession small clause structure. Particle verbs can occur in double object constructions, but they involve a benefactive-like syntax and not a caused possession small clause analysis. Furthermore, I argue that the Roots that underlie these verbs are relationless and underspecified with respect to meaning, supporting the idea that the functional vocabulary introduces arguments and fully specifies the meaning of the Roots. However, rather than adopting the position that an object is introduced at only one point in the derivation, this analysis shows that an object can be introduced at several different points within the derivation. Finally, this paper shows that argument merger is sensitive to the phase structure of the clause.}, Author = {Basilico, David}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:45:21 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:46:10 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {731--773}, Title = {Particle verbs and benefactive double objects in {E}nglish: high and low attachments}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Anttila:2008, Abstract = {Lexical items can be more or less well-formed depending on the phoneme combinations they contain. This phenomenon is called gradient phonotactics. We propose an approach to gradient phonotactics based on Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky 1993/2004). At the heart of the proposal is the Complexity Hypothesis that attributes the relative well-formedness of a lexical item to its relative grammatical complexity measured in terms of ranking information: the more complex the lexical item, the less well-formed it is. The theory orders linguistic structures in an implicational hierarchy that reflects their relative well-formedness. Some implications are universal; others depend on language-specific rankings. The Complexity Hypothesis is supported by phonotactic data from Muna (Austronesian) as recently analyzed by Coetzee and Pater (2008).}, Author = {Anttila, Arto}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:43:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:44:37 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {695--729}, Title = {Gradient phonotactics and the {C}omplexity {H}ypothesis}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Wiltschko:2008, Abstract = {Plural marking is not universally inflectional. This paper examines the formal properties of non-inflectional plural marking on the basis of a detailed case study of Halkomelem Salish. The plural marker in this language displays neither inflectional nor derivational properties. I argue that its distributional properties derive from its syntax: it is a modifier adjoined to category-neutral roots. The analysis implies that plural marking is not universally merged as a syntactic (functional) head and that it does not universally merge with nouns. This leads to the postulation of a new typology of plural marking which goes beyond the distinction between inflectional and non-inflectional plural marking. Several diagnostics to distinguish among distinct types of plural markers are established.}, Author = {Wiltschko, Martina}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:42:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:42:44 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {639--694}, Title = {The syntax of non-inflectional plural marking}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Stepanov:2008, Abstract = {This article has two major foci. The first concerns the `cartography' of structural placement of wh-adjuncts how and why, a somewhat elusive and murky issue in modern syntactic research. The non-trivial character of this issue becomes clear once it is realized that each of these items encodes more than one lexical entry in some languages, and, furthermore, different lexical entries display different syntactic distribution. One goal is then to characterize the syntactic distribution of how and why controlling for their different cross-linguistic varieties. Once the ``cartographical'' issue is clarified, a number of novel questions arise concerning the mode of licensing of different varieties of how and why. This brings us to the second, theoretical, focus of the paper: a proper mechanism for licensing wh-in situ, and, in a broader sense, wh-items lower than CP. On the basis of diverse cross-linguistic material, we provide a number of arguments strengthening the Unselective Binding approach to licensing wh-in situ and show how potential challenges can be met in a revealing and explanatory manner.}, Author = {Stepanov, Arthur and Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:40:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:41:25 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {589--638}, Title = {Cartography and licensing of \emph{wh}-adjuncts: a cross-linguistic perspective}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Ruys:2008, Abstract = {The purpose of this paper is to develop a tool for determining the unmarked position of various PP types in the Dutch Mittelfeld. The paper argues that the distribution of stranded prepositions, which obey a Freezing constraint, can be used for this purpose, and that the same holds for prepositions with a weak pronominal complement. Among the results of this twin diagnostic are independent evidence for a case-movement analysis of scrambling, and support for a particular analysis of predicative complement constructions.}, Author = {Ruys, E. G.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:39:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:40:05 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {547--587}, Title = {Stranding, weak pronouns, and the fine structure of the {D}utch {M}ittelfeld}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{McCarthy:2008, Abstract = {Many languages respect the generalization that some or all unstressed vowels are deleted. This generalization proves elusive in classic Optimality Theory, however. The source of the problem is classic OT's parallel evaluation, which requires that the effects of stress assignment and syncope be optimized together. This article argues for a version of OT called Harmonic Serialism, in which the effects of stress assignment and syncope can and must be evaluated sequentially. The results are potentially applicable to other domains where process interaction is best understood in derivational terms.}, Author = {McCarthy, John J.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:37:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:38:26 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {499--546}, Title = {The serial interaction of stress and syncope}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Keenan:2008, Abstract = {Major syntactic processes in Malagasy (Madagascar) are conditioned by its rich, typically W. Austronesian, voice system. This is true of the formation and interpretation of relative clauses, focus constructions, nominalizations, control structures, imperatives, the distribution of reflexives, and more. Similar claims hold to varying extents in related languages. Limiting ourselves to Malagasy, we derive, and compositionally interpret, nuclear Ss headed by verbs in different voices. Such Ss are directly projected from verbal affixes, not derived by A or A' movement, contra other approaches. We derive relative clauses (RCs) directly from predicates in different voices. No operator movement is needed or used. We compositionally interpret RCs, which only requires interpreting predicates in different voices but not variable binding operators or bound variables. This yields a new analysis of the ``Subjects Only'' constraint in Malagasy. Further, Malagasy's rich voice system suggests a cognitive trigger for the use of variable binding operators in RCs in voice-poor languages such as English.}, Author = {Keenan, Edward L.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:35:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:37:10 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {467--497}, Title = {Voice and relativization without movement in {M}alagasy}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Meier:2008, Author = {Meier, Richard P.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:34:21 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:34:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {451--466}, Title = {Channeling language}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Sigurdhsson:2008a, Abstract = {Icelandic case agreement suggests that nominative case is active in PRO infinitives in much the same way as in finite clauses, thus posing a difficult and a long-standing problem for generative (GB and minimalist) case theory and the PRO Theorem. In this article, I examine the Icelandic facts in detail, illustrating that the unmarked and common nominative morphology in Icelandic PRO infinitives is regular structural nominative morphology, suggesting that PRO cannot be reduced to a copy. What went wrong in the GB approach to PRO was not PRO itself but the binding theoretic and `Case' theoretic conception of it. PRO is an empty category that is simultaneously a reference variable (like overt pronouns and anaphors) and a phi-feature variable (unlike overt expressions). Due to this unique combination of variable properties, PRO cannot be deduced from other traits of grammar, such as movement, nor can it possibly be lexicalized. Importantly, also, the facts studied here suggest that case is a post-syntactic category, assigned in morphology. In contrast, Person is evidently a syntactically active category, having some of the properties and effects that have commonly been attributed to 'Case'.}, Author = {Sigur{\dh}sson, Halld{\'o}r {\'A}rmann}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:32:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:33:43 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {403--450}, Title = {The case of {PRO}}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Mezhevich:2008, Abstract = {This paper offers an analysis of Tense and Aspect as temporal predicates with complex interpretable content represented as grammatical and abstract semantic features. Building on Klein (1995) and Demirdache and Uribe-Etxebarria (2000), it is proposed that although Tense and Aspect are distinct grammatical categories they both express a relation that can be characterized as (non)-coincidence. Tense expresses (non)-coincidence of the utterance time and the assertion time, while Aspect expresses (non)-coincidence of the assertion time and the situation time. Tense and Aspect are represented by a set of two features: grammatical features [$\pm$past] and [$\pm$perf], and the abstract feature [$\pm$coin]. Thus, they have different grammatical content but the same abstract semantic content. This fine-grained distinction enables us to capture the similarities and differences between the two categories. The interaction between the two types of features together with the syntactic operation of feature agreement accounts for the temporo-aspectual interpretation of verbal morphology, and it also derives the interaction between Tense and Aspect in languages such as Russian.}, Author = {Mezhevich, Ilana}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:31:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:32:22 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {359--401}, Title = {A feature-theoretic account of tense and aspect in {R}ussian}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Lee:2008, Abstract = {This article presents a comparative semantic analysis of the aspectual and focus adverbs already, still and STILL in English and imi/pelsse `already' and acik/yothay `still' in Korean based on their presuppositions and their focus interpretation. I argue that the two contrasting views of aspectual adverbs as logical duals (L{\"o}bner 1989, 1999) and as scalar (focus) particles (Michaelis 1993, 1996; Israel 1995) are both necessary in order to explain the English and Korean data. Aspect concerns the internal structure of events, relating a current state with the onset or the end of the state. These transitions are available for focusing, which triggers an explicit contrast between the asserted state and an alternative state with an opposite polarity. Korean is shown to lexicalize aspectual and focus adverbs differently from what is expressed in English by a single adverb with focus marked prosody. The meaning of aspectual and focus adverbs in both English and Korean is representated in Discourse Representation Theory (Kamp and Reyle 1993; van Eijck and Kamp 1997).}, Author = {Lee, Eunhee}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:30:13 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:30:58 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {339--358}, Title = {Aspectual and focus adverbs in {E}nglish and {K}orean}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Coetzee:2008a, Abstract = {This paper documents a restriction against the co-occurrence of homorganic consonants in the root morphemes of Muna, a western Austronesian language, and compares the Muna pattern with the much-studied similar pattern in Arabic. As in Arabic, the restriction applies gradiently: its force depends on the place of articulation of the consonants involved, and on whether the homorganic consonants are similar in terms of other features. Muna differs from Arabic in the relative strengths of these other features in affecting co-occurrence rates of homorganic consonants. Along with the descriptions of these patterns, this paper presents phonological analyses in terms of weighted constraints, as in Harmonic Grammar. This account uses a gradual learning algorithm that acquires weights that reflect the relative frequency of different sequence types in the two languages. The resulting grammars assign the sequences acceptability scores that correlate with a measure of their attestedness in the lexicon. This application of Harmonic Grammar illustrates its ability to capture both gradient and categorical patterns.}, Author = {Coetzee, Andries W. and Pater, Joe}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:28:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:29:22 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {289--337}, Title = {Weighted constraints and gradient restrictions on place co-occurrence in {M}una and {A}rabic}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Boskovic:2008, Abstract = {Based on a number of operations creating operator-variable chains, namely, wh-movement, focalization, topicalization, quantifier raising, and the NPI-licensing movement, the article argues that operators in operator-variable chains cannot undergo further operator movement. It is shown that the generalization in question can be deduced from Chomsky's (2000, 2001a) Activation Condition. The article also discusses the contexts where Bulgarian, a multiple wh-fronting language, allows extraction out of wh-islands. A new generalization is proposed regarding the ability of languages like Bulgarian to violate the Wh-Island Constraint in the contexts in question, which dissociates it from multiple wh-fronting and ties it to a property of D, in particular, availability of affixal articles.}, Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:26:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:27:54 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {249--287}, Title = {On the operator freezing effect}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Zanuttini:2008, Abstract = {Imperative subjects in English are puzzling in several respects: null subjects are possible with a definite interpretation, unlike in other clause types; quantificational subjects are often restricted to range over a set containing the addressee and exhibit binding possibilities not readily available to them in declaratives and interrogatives; and third person referential subjects are for most speakers limited to bare noun phrases. On the empirical side, this paper provides a comprehensive discussion of these properties that makes sense of the sometimes contradictory observations found in the literature. On the theoretical side, it argues that the syntactic representation of imperatives contains a functional projection not present in other clause types. This projection plays a role both in preventing the instantiation of a predication relation between the subject and the predicate, and, when sufficiently local, in licensing the special syntactic properties of the subject. This proposal differs from those that view the properties of imperative subjects as deriving uniquely from the semantic or pragmatic component; it can be seen as building on the general intuition of the old performative hypothesis, though recasting it at a level of abstraction that captures more adequately the properties of imperatives.}, Author = {Zanuttini, Rafaella}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:25:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:25:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {185--218}, Title = {Encoding the addressee in syntax: evidence from {E}nglish imperative subjects}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Topintzi:2008, Abstract = {Moraic theory standardly syllabifies geminates in a coda-onset configuration whereby the coda bears a mora. Initial geminates pose a serious problem for the theory since word-initially no coda exists to host the first half of the geminate. Previous proposals have addressed this issue but have not resolved it satisfactorily, because they have created new difficulties pertaining to prosodification, syllabification or generation of insufficient or incorrect patterns. I propose that treating the geminate as a moraic onset simultaneously resolves all the issues above, provided we dispense with the stipulation that onsets are never moraic. An important prediction emerges from this proposal: onset geminates could also occur word-medially. I claim that such prediction is empirically confirmed in languages like Marshallese and Trique. I also argue that moraic theory is right in claiming that geminates are underlyingly moraic consonants -- rather than simply long -- and demonstrate how in the current model the contrast between geminates and singletons is preserved in all positions in the word.}, Author = {Topintzi, Nina}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:23:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:24:26 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {147--184}, Title = {On the existence of moraic onset geminates}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Thornton:2008, Abstract = {This paper examines over 900 why-questions gathered in a longitudinal study of an English-speaking child from 2 to 6 years of age. The child went through a protracted stage in which many why-questions lacked subject-aux inversion, in contrast to other wh-questions. While this asymmetry has been observed in the previous literature, several new observations also emerged. First, the child permitted focus phrases, topic phrases and subordinate clauses to intervene between why and the subject NP in matrix why-questions with no I to C movement. Second, subject-aux inversion was consistently manifested in long-distance questions with tensed embedded clauses, and in utterances with why that were not information-seeking questions. Based on the pattern of data, it is proposed that some children initially permit why to merge high in the left periphery, in SpecIntP, following a proposal for Italian by Rizzi, L. (2001). On the position ``Int(errogative)'' in the left periphery of the clause. In G. Cinque & G. Salvi (Eds.), Current studies in Italian syntax (pp. 287-296). Oxford: Elsevier. The paper considers whether the child data are best explained (i) by a why-parameter that distinguishes languages permitting merge of why from those languages limited to movement (cf. Ko, H. (2005). Syntax of why-in-situ: Merge into [SpecCP] in the overt syntax. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 23, 867-916.), or (ii) as evidence of a universal principle. In the final analysis, the parameter account is preferred, because it explains the individual variation and the sharp transition to the adult grammar that is observed in some children.}, Author = {Thornton, Rosalind}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:18:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:18:37 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {107--146}, Title = {Why continuity}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Rezac:2008a, Abstract = {This article explores a syntactic approach to the Person Case Constraint, a ban on 1st and 2nd person agreement casued by a dative. The approach proposes that the constraint is due to the interference in person Agree of a head H and its expected controller A by a dative between the two. This predicts that it is absent if the dative does not intervene, or if A moves past the dative. Both predictions are correct. The latter is developed at length from Basque ``absolutive displacement" and Icelandic ``long raising," which show the predicted repair of the constraint by movement, through anomalous ergative morphology and overt displacement respectively. A further correct consequence is that the constraint is repaired undetectably in the unaccusatives of accusative languages, except when movement past the dative is unavailable. Morphology does not provide the right tools, since it collapses the required structural distinctions, and the saving effect of movement on agreement is unpredicted. Finally, an independent argument is developed to show that the Person Case Constraint is visible to ``narrow syntax."}, Author = {Rezac, Milan}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:16:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:21:43 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {61--106}, Title = {The syntax of eccentric agreement: the {P}erson {C}ase {C}onstraint and absolutive displacement in {B}asque}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{Legate:2008, Abstract = {This paper examines the placement of aspect and agreement clitics in Warlpiri. A common misconception regarding clitic placement in Warlpiri is cleared up: clitic placement does not depend on syllable count. It is also shown that these clitics do not uniformly appear in second position, syntactically or phonologically, making the standard label of ``second position clitics'' a misnomer. An analysis is developed in terms of syntactic head movement combined with local morphological reordering. The discussion also reveals a genuine morphological first word phenomenon, whereby a preverb may be split from its associated verb.}, Author = {Legate, Julie Anne}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:14:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:15:27 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--60}, Title = {Warlpiri and the theory of second position clitics}, Volume = {26}, Year = {2008}} @article{McCloskey:2007, Abstract = {This paper examines so-called autonomous forms of the verb in Irish in the context of ongoing work on the syntax and semantics of arbitrary pronominal subjects (on on French; man in German and so on). It argues for the syntactic presence of a phonologically null subject in such constructions and attempts to understand various characteristics of such impersonal constructions (with respect to binding and control especially) in the light of that hypothesis.}, Author = {McCloskey, James}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:06:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:07:09 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {825--857}, Title = {The grammar of autonomy in {I}rish}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Law:2007, Abstract = {The pseudo-cleft analysis and the clausal complement analysis for the cleft construction in Malagasy are compared. The two are similar with respect to constituency, placement of negation and adverbials, and yet exhibit a number of differences. Restrictions on the predicate, tense-marking on locatives and PPs, multiple occurrence of adverbs, binding into PPs as well as coordination are shown to be most problematic for the pseudo-cleft account according to which the clefted phrase is the predicate and what follows it is the DP subject with an empty head noun. The obligatory empty head noun, the non-DP distribution of the suggested DP subject, clefting of adjuncts and long-distance dependency are also troublesome for this view. These facts can be straightforwardly accommodated in the clausal complement analysis in which the cleft construction has a structure in which an empty copula verb takes as complement a functional projection headed by the focus particle no, and the clefted phrase is fronted to its surface position. Certain facts concerning discontinuous phrases and the adverb daholo `all' ostensibly support the clefted phrase being the predicate, but turn out to have no specific bearing on the cleft construction.}, Author = {Law, Paul}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:04:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:05:49 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {765--823}, Title = {The syntactic structure of the cleft construction in {M}alagasy}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Haddican:2007, Abstract = {This paper develops an account of do-support in VP focus constructions in Central and Western Basque (CWB) dialects. In particular, this paper argues that CWB dialects, along with Korean, form a class of do-support languages whose dummy verb insertion mechanism differs slightly from that of English and Monnese. In all four of these languages, the dummy verb occupies a position that is, in marked environments, inaccessible to the verb. However, in Korean and CWB, unlike in English and Monnese, the verb's inability to raise to value this feature is not due to its inflectional poverty, but rather because it must bear a nominalizing infinitival affix for independent reasons; this nominal infinitive may not bear aspectual morphology, and a dummy verb is merged to do so instead. Moreover, Basque do-support is not a last-resort phenomenon as in Chomsky's classic analysis of English do-support (Chomsky 1957). That is, the unavailability of do-support in non-verb focalization constructions is not due to competition with a more economical alternative, but rather is independently excluded. This approach avoids a violation of the Inclusiveness Condition inherent in economy-based approaches to do-support that generate the dummy verb in the computational component.}, Author = {Haddican, Bill}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 10:01:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:03:56 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {735--764}, Title = {On \emph{egin}: \emph{do}-support and {VP} focus in {C}entral and {W}estern {B}asque}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Frascarelli:2007, Abstract = {In this paper a novel approach to (a subpart of) the null subject parameter is proposed, in which the interpretation of a thematic pro in subject position is crucially dependent on the syntax and discourse properties of Topic constituents. Based on the analysis of spoken corpora and interface considerations, evidence is provided that preverbal `subjects' sit in an A'-position in a null subject language like Italian and that the interpretation of referential null subjects depends on a matching relation (Agree) with a specific type of Topic. In a cartographic approach to discourse functions, this is identified with the Aboutness-shift Topic (Frascarelli and Hinterh{\"o}lzl 2007) that is merged in the C-domain and is endowed with the edge feature [+aboutness] -- an `extended EPP feature'. A Topic Criterion is thus proposed that correlates core grammar with discourse requirements and accounts for the syntactic identification of a referential pro. The Avoid Pronoun Principle is reinterpreted as a structural condition that implies the existence of silent Topics.}, Author = {Frascarelli, Mara}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:59:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 10:00:13 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {691--734}, Title = {Subjects, topics and the interpretation of referential \emph{pro}}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Belletti:2007, Abstract = {This article reports the results of experiments targeting the production and interpretation of postverbal subjects, and null and overt pronominal subjects, by near-native speakers of Italian whose native language is English. The results directly bear on both theoretical issues and developmental acquisition questions. It is argued that properties related to the null-subject parameter are sensitive to discourse factors that determine the use of both postverbal subjects and pronominal subjects. More specifically, it is claimed that the availability of null pronominal subjects and the availability of postverbal subjects do not necessarily correlate. The near-native grammars analyzed here illustrate a special instance of this lack of correlation. Furthermore, near-natives show non-native-like behavior in the use of postverbal subjects, and in the overuse of overt pronominal subjects in tensed clauses. The proposal is put forward that, although resetting of the null-subject parameter has taken place in the speakers' L2 Italian grammar, the relevant L1 computations are preserved and accessed in L2 use, without violating any formal conditions; this is the source of non-target behavior. The analysis proposed exploits cartographic insights on discourse-related computations, and suggests that the principles of economy may be instantiated differently in native and near-native grammars.}, Author = {Belletti, Adriana and Bennati, Elisa and Sorace, Antonella}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:56:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:58:46 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {4}, Pages = {657--689}, Title = {Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native {I}talian}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Yoon:2007, Abstract = {The question of whether languages like Korean and Japanese possess genuine instances of Subject-to-Object Raising (SOR) has been a matter of debate since Kuno (1976), as a number of the properties of the putative SOR construction in the languages differ from those found in languages like English, while others are shared between the languages. I argue in this paper that the paradoxical properties begin to fall into place once we posit that what undergoes movement in SOR in these languages is not the embedded subject, but the embedded Major Subject. The Major Subject is the initial Nom-marked DP in a Multiple Nominative Construction. It is shown that if we posit that the Major Subject raises in SOR, the unexpected properties of SOR can be accounted for. Under this analysis, SOR in Korean and Japanese conform to known constraints on A-movement taking place from the highest A-specifier (Major Subject) position of the embedded clause. It is the coindexation of the Major Subject with the predicate-internal position that gives rise to the illusion of non-locality. I then compare the analysis with an alternative base-generation analysis. While the two are roughly equal in terms of coverage, only the Major Subject raising analysis is able to account for properties of the raised nominal that could only have been determined in the embedded clause.}, Author = {Yoon, James H.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:52:21 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:53:03 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {615--653}, Title = {Raising of major arguments in {K}orean and {J}apanese}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Potsdam:2007, Abstract = {Linguistic material cannot be freely deleted in a sentence; rather, elided material must be recoverable via some kind of parallelism with an antecedent. This paper uses sluicing (IP ellipsis) in Malagasy to argue that this parallelism requirement is a semantic restriction and not a syntactic one. An elided constituent must be semantically parallel to its antecedent but need not have parallel syntactic structure (Merchant, 2001). In Malagasy, wh-questions are pseudoclefts. Given that antecedent clauses are not pseudoclefts, sluicing is ruled out if syntactic parallelism is necessary. Sluicing is correctly allowed if there is only a semantic parallelism requirement. The paper considers an alternative that would avoid this conclusion: Malagasy wh-questions are clefts and the construction under investigation is pseudosluicing (Merchant, 1998), which is not subject to a linguistic parallelism requirement. This alternative is shown to be untenable.}, Author = {Potsdam, Eric}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:50:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:51:37 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {577--613}, Title = {Malagasy sluicing and its consequences for the identity requirement on ellipsis}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Johns:2007, Abstract = {This paper argues that the phenomenon of noun incorporation in Inuktitut derives from the fact that the set of verbs involved are all light verbs in the sense of being functional elements excluding lexical or root material. Verbs found in noun incorporation in Inuktitut are in little v and syntactically Merge with a nominal root complement. A parameter which requires that the first root must syntactically move to the top of the tree results in the leftmost position of the root and its apparent incorporation. Unlike Mohawk, where classical noun incorporation is a result of argument licensing, Inuktitut noun incorporation is a subset of a general syntactic operation which targets roots. The light verb analysis of noun incorporation predicts that the set of verbs found in noun incorporation are a finite class with a restricted and predictable semantic range. It is further proposed that obligatory noun incorporation universally involves light verbs. Data in support of this claim are shown from Wakashan and Chukchi. In contrast to a grammaticalized account of this class of verbs, it is argued that these light verbs are universally available as elementary syntactic components. Thus, the limited range and incorporating nature of this class of verbs is explained by their being light verbs.}, Author = {Johns, Alana}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:49:09 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:50:14 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {535--576}, Title = {Restricting noun incorporation: root movement}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Cat:2007, Abstract = {This paper revisits the classic tests for movement that have been proposed in the literature on dislocated structures, arguing that discourse factors have a significant impact on the outcome of such tests. On this basis, French dislocation is shown to be a syntactically unified phenomenon involving both Left- and Right-Dislocation, irrespective of whether it is resumed by a clitic or a non-clitic element. The epitome of interface phenomena, French dislocation is argued to be the output of the interaction between syntax and the discourse component, requiring only a very limited contribution of narrow syntax: all that is required is that the dislocated element be merged by adjunction to a Discourse Projection (defined as a maximal projection with root properties). No agreement or checking of a designated (e.g. topic) feature is necessary, hence no syntactic movement of any sort need be postulated. The so-called resumptive element is argued to be a full-fledged pronoun rather than a true syntactic resumptive. The relation between the dislocated element and its resumptive is captured in terms of discourse coreference. The core syntactic and interpretive properties of left- and right-dislocation are shown to be identical; differences between the two configurations are shown to derive straightforwardly from the properties of the two sides of the clause periphery.}, Author = {de Cat, C{\'e}cile}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:47:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:48:12 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {485--534}, Title = {French dislocation without movement}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Bale:2007, Abstract = {In this article, I propose that intransitive verbs and stative, transitive verbs are fundamentally different from non-stative, transitive verbs. The latter create verb phrases that contain more than one propositional level whereas the former do not permit any propositional levels within their derived verb phrases. Evidence for this distinction comes from the interaction of again with the different types of verbs. Non-stative, transitive verbs allow again to introduce presuppositions that do not involve the verb's subject. In contrast intransitive verbs and stative, transitive verbs only permit presuppositions that include the verb's subject. Not only does the evidence of propositional complexity and the existence of subjectless presuppositions demonstrate a dichotomy between different types of verb phrases, such evidence and presuppositions also provide a means of testing in which syntactic positions quantifier phrases can be interpreted. As I demonstrate in this article, evidence from the presuppositional content of again suggests that object quantifier phrases normally cannot be interpreted within the verb phrase even when such phrases contain propositional levels. Only resultative verbs allow for quantifier phrases to be interpreted within the verb phrase.}, Author = {Bale, Alan Clinton}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:45:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:46:39 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {3}, Pages = {447--483}, Title = {Quantifiers and verb phrases: An exploration of propositional complexity}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Zuraw:2009, Abstract = {The relationship between constraints on surface forms and operations that alter representations is of central interest in phonological theory. This squib presents a case of diverse ``repairs'' in response to a marked structure---labial {\ldots} labial sequences---created by um-infixation in stems beginning with (or, in some cases, merely containing) labial consonants in Austronesian languages. We review several strategies, which for the most part do not cluster according to subfamilies: tolerance, gaps, loss of stem consonant, loss of infix nasality, stem dissimilation, infix dissimilation, prefixation, and non-realization of infix. The evidence indicates that avoidance of these sequences applies only within the root-and-infix domain, and only in derived environments. This diversity of repairs seems unexpected if changes should be perceptually minimal; we suggest possible explanations.}, Author = {Zuraw, Kie and Yu-An, Lu}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:42:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:43:31 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {197--224}, Title = {Diverse repairs for multiple labial consonants}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Rivero:2009, Abstract = {This paper discusses Bulgarian and Slovenian constructions with a dispositional reading and no apparent dispositional marker, such as Bulgarian Na Ivan mu se rabote{\v s}e. Such a sentence combines a dative logical subject Ivan with an inflected verb rabote{\v s}e `work', and roughly corresponds to `Ivan was in a working mood', so does not entail that Ivan worked. I argue that such constructions consist of two core ingredients that account both for their syntactic properties, and for their modal flavor as dispositions. One ingredient is an Imperfective Operator in Viewpoint Aspect as the source of modality. Such an Operator resembles in syntactic and semantic properties both the Progressive Operator in so-called English Futurates such as For two weeks, the Red Sox were playing the Yankees today, and the Spanish modal Imperfecto. The other ingredient is a High Applicative Phrase with an oblique subject, which, other than determining syntactic properties, contributes to a difference in modal flavor with English Futurates. English Futurates denote plans, and a hypothesis is that this is due to their nominative subjects being paired to a presupposition giving them control over the intended event. By contrast, the Slavic constructions in this paper denote dispositions, not plans, because their oblique subjects cannot be paired with a similar presupposition.}, Author = {Rivero, Mar{\'\i}a Luisa}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:40:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:41:31 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {151--196}, Title = {Intensionality, high applicatives, and aspect: involuntary state constructions in {B}ulgarian and {S}lovenian}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Meyer:2009, Abstract = {B{\"u}ring and Hartmann (2001) and Reis (2005) discuss reconstruction data with focus particles in German which they claim show that German allows adjunction of phonologically integrated focus particles to the root clause. We show that the facts are better explained by independent pragmatic constraints on semantic judgments and conclude therefore that there are no arguments in support of root clause adjunction of such focus particles in German.}, Author = {Meyer, Marie-Christine and Sauerland, Uli}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:38:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:39:44 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {139--150}, Title = {A pragmatic constraint on ambiguity detection}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Koontz-Garboden:2009, Abstract = {This paper provides a comprehensive review and analysis of the facts of anticausativization, the phenomenon whereby an inchoative verb is morphologically derived from its causative counterpart (e.g., Spanish romper `break (trans)' versus romperse `break (intrans)'). It treats the phenomenon as reflexivization (Chierchia 2004), providing a number of new arguments for this kind of treatment, and showing how it, as opposed to alternatives in the literature, accounts for the wide range of data reviewed. In addition, the facts laid out show that inchoatives derived from causatives retain the CAUSE operator present in the lexical semantic representation of the causative verb from which they are derived, contrary to the widely held view of anticausativization as a process that deletes a CAUSE operator. In this way, it is shown that anticausativization does not provide an argument against the Monotonicity Hypothesis, the idea that word formation operations do not delete operators from lexical semantic representations.}, Author = {Koontz-Garboden, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:37:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:37:59 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {77--138}, Title = {Anticausativization}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Dehe:2009, Abstract = {This study tests a syntactic property---namely the availability of N- vs. NP-raising in DPs---through prosodic means. The opposition between N- and NP-raising is central to the ongoing debate about the internal representation of DPs, yet it often eludes testing by syntactic means alone. As we show in this study, the two syntactic hypotheses are instead neatly distinguished by the distinct prosodic phrasing predicted by each operation. In this paper, we present the results of an empirical experiment designed to test the prosodic phrasing of N-A and A-N sequences in Italian and the corresponding syntactic implications. As prosodic cues, we use syllabic and word lengthening effects induced by phonological phrase boundaries. According to our results, A and N share the same phonological phrase in both orders. Regarding the syntactic implications of this finding, we show that under all current models of syntax-prosody mapping the underlying syntactic structure responsible for the attested prosodic phrasing must necessarily rely on N-raising. Finally, we propose an analysis of Italian DPs where the N-raising operation found necessary in light of the attested prosodic phrasing is reconciled with the evidence for DP-internal phrasal movement discussed in Cinque (2005 2006).}, Author = {Deh{\'e}, Nicole and Samek-Lodovici, Vieri}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:34:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:36:31 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {45--75}, Title = {On the prosody and syntax of {DP}s: evidence from {I}talian noun adjective sequences}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Davis:2009, Abstract = {Several languages of northwestern North America systematically fail to show obviation (``Condition C'') effects in contexts where an R-expression is c-commanded by a covalued pronoun. This paper examines Condition C-defying dependencies in one such language, St'{\'a}t'imcets (Lillooet Salish). It is shown here that Condition C violations in St'{\'a}t'imcets are not confined to coreference anaphora, since they may involve sloppy identity; however they are limited to cases where the dependency (a) does not contain a quantificational expression and (b) crosses a clause boundary. Employing a version of linking theory, this paper argues that Condition C-defying dependencies are ``upside-down''---rather than involving a name unexpectedly depending on a c-commanding pronoun, they involve a dependent pronoun c-commanding an antecedent name. In order to account for this possibility, a parametrized version of the Independence Principle (Safir 2004b) is invoked, whose domain in St'{\'a}t'imcets is restricted to the minimal clause. The facts here provide a direct challenge to the Universalist Hypothesis on anaphora.}, Author = {Davis, Henry}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:33:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:37:02 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--43}, Title = {Cross-linguistic variation in anaphoric dependencies: evidence from the {P}acific {N}orthwest}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Osborne:2009, Abstract = {The paper explores the syntax of comparatives in English and German. The account builds on the insight that the syntax of comparatives is a combination of coordination and subordination. At times a than-expression is coordinate to a string that immediately precedes it, and at other times, it is subordinate to it. Six key observations are the pillars of the account. These observations accomplish three goals: 1) They determine when comparative coordination obtains, as opposed to comparative subordination; 2) they predict the form that a particular than-expression can assume (e.g. phrasal, clausal); and most importantly, 3) they predict to a large extent the distribution of than-expressions. The key concept is functional equivalence. One can predict the distribution of many than-expressions by acknowledging where they can appear with respect to their functional equivalents. The theory-neutral account remains entirely in surface syntax.}, Author = {Osborne, Timothy}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:30:28 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:31:21 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {427--454}, Title = {Comparative coordination vs. comparative subordination}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Markman:2009, Abstract = {The paper argues that Case and Agreement are subject to parametric variation and explores the consequences of this claim with a particular attention to word order. Departing from much generative work, it is argued that languages can lack abstract Case and/or abstract Agreement. By modifying several Minimalist assumptions, it is demonstrated that languages without Case, but with Agreement will require overt NPs to appear in non-argumental, dislocated positions. These are exemplified by Mohawk and Kinande. In contrast, languages with Case features may allow, but not require NP dislocation. These are exemplified by all of the Indo-European languages and Japanese. Finally, languages that lack both Case and Agreement are predicted to have a rigid word order. Chinese is used as an example of such a language. In addition, the paper addresses a number of phenomena that pose a problem for the view that Case and Agreement are universal and are better understood if these properties are taken to vary parametrically. The phenomena include locative inversion and inverse voice constructions in Bantu languages, the distribution of subject anaphors in Japanese, and the non co-occurrence of overt accusative case with overt object agreement.}, Author = {Markman, Vita G.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:29:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:30:09 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {379--426}, Title = {On the parametric variation of case and agreement}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kim:2009a, Abstract = {The overarching goal of this article is to account for why the Internally-Headed Relative Clause, the direct perception, and the factive constructions in Korean have an identical form involving the pronominal kes and the relativizer -un, despite the fact that one construction instantiates relativization and the other two instantiate complementation. I solve this puzzle by recasting Kim's (2007) analysis of Internally-Headed relatives in a Kratzerian situation semantic framework (e.g., Kratzer 1989, 1998, 2002). The central claim is that the three kes-constructions have an identical form because they all instantiate situation subordination that is facilitated by an E-type pronoun and a relativization strategy. The proposed analysis shows that E-type pronouns and relativizers can have more flexible semantics than widely assumed. It also sheds new light on the connection between modification and complementation across languages. Furthermore, it provides an argument for Kratzerian situation semantic theory in dealing with the interpretations of complex clauses.}, Author = {Kim, Min-Joo}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:26:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:28:39 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {345--377}, Title = {E-type anaphora and three types of \emph{kes}-construction in {K}orean}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kandybowicz:2009, Abstract = {Though well established as grammatical domains within phonology and morphology, edges have recently come to play a central role in both syntactic analysis and explanation within the Minimalist Program. This article adduces further empirical justification for the inclusion of edges in the Minimalist ontology. By way of two case studies, it is demonstrated that reference to edge domains in both the narrow syntax and at the syntax-phonology interface facilitates principled explanations to two unsolved puzzles in Nupe. The first study investigates a peculiar restriction on extraction from perfect domains. The most tenable solution emerges when both phase edges and Edge Features are embraced. New insights into the nature of Edge Features arise as a consequence. The second study concerns the proper characterization of Comp-trace effects in the language. The most tenable characterization emerges when they are viewed through the lens of the syntax-phonology interface. Comp-trace phenomena are shown to exhibit phono-syntactic edge sensitivity. New insights into the syntax-phonology interface arise as a consequence.}, Author = {Kandybowicz, Jason}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:24:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:25:28 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {305--344}, Title = {Embracing edges: syntactic and phono-syntactic edge sensitivity in {N}upe}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Harris:2009, Abstract = {Although multiple exponence has long been recognized by some, morpheme-based theories predict that it will not exist. To deal with the existence of double exponence in some languages, a variety of ways have been sought around the restrictions imposed by these theories. In Batsbi, a language of the Nakh-Dagestanian family, in principle as many as six markers may occur in a single verb (five gendernumber markers and one person-number marker), each agreeing in many instances with the same argument; in fact, examples presented here have up to four agreement markers. The implications of this for linguistic theory are explored. An analysis is proposed in terms of word-based morphology.}, Author = {Harris, Alice C.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:22:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:23:21 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {267--303}, Title = {Exuberant exponence in {B}atsbi}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @article{Borsley:2009, Abstract = {A notable feature of Welsh is a number of agreement phenomena, all of which only occur with pronouns. Finite verbs agree with a following pronominal subject, prepositions agree with a following pronominal complement, and a particle which introduces non-finite clauses agrees with a following pronominal subject. Similarly, nouns have a preceding clitic agreeing with a following pronominal possessor, non-finite verbs have a preceding clitic agreeing with a following pronominal object, and what looks like the non-finite form of bod ``be'', which introduces certain subordinate clauses, has a preceding clitic agreeing with a following pronominal subject. There seems to be a single phenomenon here. Approaches that involve an abstract level face problems and there is no evidence that the phenomenon involves an abstract level. It seems quite plausible to suggest that superficial linear order is crucial, and this idea can be implemented in a straightforward way within linearization-based Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG). The properties of agreement also entail that unexpressed noun phrases of various kinds must be represented in the superficial constituent structure and not just at some abstract level, contrary to the view of some frameworks.}, Author = {Borsley, Robert D.}, Date-Added = {2009-06-17 09:18:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-17 09:20:29 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Number = {2}, Pages = {225--265}, Title = {On the superficiality of {W}elsh agreement}, Volume = {27}, Year = {2009}} @book{Ramchand:2008, Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom}, Author = {Gillian Catriona Ramchand}, Date-Added = {2009-06-15 13:53:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-06-15 13:54:47 -0400}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Series = {Cambridge Studies in Linguistics}, Title = {Verb Meaning and the Lexicon}, Year = {2008}} @article{Vicente:2009, Author = {Vicente, Luis}, Date-Added = {2009-05-26 08:59:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-26 09:01:02 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {158--191}, Title = {An Alternative to Remnant Movement for Partial Predicate Fronting}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Fernandez-Soriano:2009, Abstract = {In this paper we analyze the behavior of some temporal constructions in two varieties of Spanish: those with the verb llevar 'to carry', used in the standard variety, and those with tener 'to have', which are characteristic of some American dialects. Our purpose is twofold: on the one hand, we try to account for the argument structure of these constructions, and on the other, we seek to give an analysis of the aspectual restrictions they show. These restrictions will be related to the fact that both verbs are light verbs incorporating an abstract preposition, allative in the case of llevar and of central coincidence in the case of tener. The paper constitutes a further application of Hale and Keyser's framework to a new set of data. Some related constructions involving movement verbs will be described and discussed as well.}, Author = {Fern{\'a}ndez-Soriano, Olga and Rigau, Gemma}, Date-Added = {2009-05-26 08:57:15 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-26 08:58:21 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {135--157}, Title = {On Certain Light Verbs in {S}panish: The Case of Temporal \emph{Tener} and \emph{Llevar}}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Aoshima:2009, Abstract = {This article presents two on-line self-paced reading studies and three off-line acceptability judgment studies on the processing of backward anaphoric dependencies in Japanese in which a pronoun precedes potential antecedent noun phrases. The studies investigate the real-time formation of coreference relations and operator-variable binding relations to determine whether speakers of head-final languages are able to construct grammatically accurate syntactic structures before they encounter a verb. The results of the acceptability rating studies confirm previous claims that backwards anaphoric dependencies in Japanese are more acceptable in configurations where a pronoun has been fronted via scrambling from a position where it would be c-commanded by its antecedent. The results of the on-line studies demonstrate that these acceptability contrasts have an immediate impact on parsing. Reading-time results showed immediate sensitivity to the semantic congruency between an NP and a preceding pronoun in noncanonical (``scrambled") word orders, and no immediate effect of semantic congruency otherwise. This contrast was found both for coreference relations involving the personal pronouns kare/kanojo (experiment 1) and for operator-variable relations involving the demonstrative pronoun soko (experiment 3). These findings go beyond previous evidence for incremental parsing in head-final languages by showing that Japanese speakers build compositional structures (such as anaphoric relations) in a grammatically constrained fashion in advance of encountering a verb in the input.}, Author = {Aoshima, Sachiko and Yoshida, Masaya and Phillips, Colin}, Date-Added = {2009-05-26 08:53:56 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-26 08:56:18 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {93--134}, Title = {Incremental Processing of Coreference and Binding in {J}apanese}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @book{Winter:2001, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Winter, Yoad}, Date-Added = {2009-05-18 08:19:59 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-18 08:21:14 -0400}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Title = {Flexibility Principles in {B}oolean Semantics}, Year = {2001}} @book{Nunes:2004, Address = {Cambridge, Massachusetts}, Author = {Nunes, Jairo}, Date-Added = {2009-05-18 08:18:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-18 08:21:29 -0400}, Publisher = {MIT Press}, Series = {Linguistic Inquiry Monographs}, Title = {Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement}, Year = {2004}} @article{Potts:2009, Author = {Potts, Christopher and Asudeh, Ash and Cable, Seth and Hara, Yurie and McCready, Eric and Alonso-Ovalle, Luis and Bhatt, Rajesh}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:38:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:40:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {356--366}, Title = {Expressives and Identity Conditions}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Lechner:2009, Author = {Lechner, Winfried}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:36:48 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:38:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {346--356}, Title = {A Puzzle for Remnant Movement Analyses of Verb-Second}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Landau:2009, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:35:17 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:36:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {343--346}, Title = {This Construction Looks Like a Copy is Optional}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Sprouse:2009, Abstract = {This reply revisits the topic of syntactic satiation as first discussed in Snyder 2000. I argue that the satiation effect reported in Snyder 2000 is the result of a response strategy in which participants attempt to equalize the number of yes and no responses, a strategy enabled by the design features of Snyder's original experiment. Four predictions differentiate the response strategy from a true satiation effect. Nine experiments are presented to test these predictions. The results are discussed with respect to the nature of satiation, the stability of acceptability judgments, and the consequences for linguistic methodology.}, Author = {Sprouse, Jon}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:33:39 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:34:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {329--341}, Title = {Revisiting Satiation: Evidence for an Equalization Response Strategy}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Johnson:2009a, Abstract = {Pseudogapping is no misnomer. Despite their many tempting similarities, gapping and pseudogapping are distinct constructions. Pseudo-gapping is a special instance of VP-ellipsis, while gapping, I argue, is a special instance of across-the-board movement. Squeezing gapping into across-the-board movement has its own discomforts, however, which I suggest can be remedied by retailoring our syntax to include string-based output constraints. I sketch one such alteration that involves apparent Left Branch Condition violations.}, Author = {Johnson, Kyle}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:31:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:33:05 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {289--328}, Title = {Gapping Is Not ({VP}-) Ellipsis}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Heinz:2009, Abstract = {Idsardi (2006) claims that Optimality Theory (OT; Prince and Smolensky 1993, 2004) is ``in general computationally intractable" on the basis of a proof adapted from Eisner 1997a. We take issue with this conclusion on two grounds. First, the intractability result holds only in cases where the constraint set is not fixed in advance (contra usual definitions of OT), and second, the result crucially depends on a particular representation of OT grammars. We show that there is an alternative representation of OT grammars that allows for efficient computation of optimal surface forms and provides deeper insight into the sources of complexity of OT. We conclude that it is a mistake to reject OT on the grounds that it is computationally intractable.}, Author = {Heinz, Jeffrey and Kobele, Gregory M. and Riggle, Jason}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:29:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:30:41 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {277--288}, Title = {Evaluating the Complexity of {O}ptimality {T}heory}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Lopez:2009, Abstract = {The overarching question addressed here is how syntactic structures based on constituency (dominance, c-command) are to be mapped onto linear phonetic strings. I argue that both prosodic principles and narrow-syntactic principles play a role in the linearization of syntactic structures. I take Kayne's (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom as a starting point: (asymmetric) c-command maps onto precedence relations. Two wide-ranging predictions of Kayne's theory are that specifiers precede their heads and that a head can only have one specifier or adjunct. Although abundant evidence supports these predictions, there is nonetheless a well-known class of apparent counterexamples: Romance languages allow both rightward and multiple dislocations. I take the LCA to be a soft constraint, overruled by a constraint of the WRAP family that seeks to combine a verb and its extended projection in one intonational phrase. Apparent rightward movement is the outcome of rightward linearization forced by WRAP. The possibility of multiple dislocations is compatible with the LCA within the assumptions made here.}, Author = {L{\'o}pez, Luis}, Date-Added = {2009-05-14 12:27:09 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:28:46 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {239--276}, Title = {Ranking the Linear Correspondence Axiom}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Westergaard:2009, Abstract = {Based on spontaneous speech data from adults and children in an acquisition corpus, this paper discusses `optional' verb-second (V2) word order in wh-questions in present-day Norwegian dialects, arguing that hte variation is due to a diachronic change in progress. The argument is based on the nature of the variation and te frequencies with which the different wh-questions are attested in typical child-directed speech. The paper takes a microparametric approach to V2 which assumes the existence of many V2 grammars, differeing from each other with respect to informaiton structure and the status of the various wh-elements. These grammars are learnable because children are sensitive to minor but linguistically relevant distinctions in the acquisition process. Nevertheless, certain distinctions are vulnerable to change if the corresponding cues are expressed in the children's input with a very low frequency. On this perspective, gradual historical development may be considered to be the result of many small I-language changes in succession.}, Author = {Westergaard, Marit}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 10:41:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-11 10:41:52 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {49--79}, Title = {Microvariation as diachrony: A view from acquisition}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Poletto:2009, Abstract = {In this work I analyze a construction containing an additional past participle auxiliary in Romance and German dialects and show that, although apparently similar, they semantic value ofthe additional auxiliary is different in the two sets of dialects: in German it is an index of terminativity, in Romance of anteriority. However, an implicational scale ruling the distribution of the additional auxiliary which goes from unergative to passive verbs (going through unaccusative verbs) is valid across all dialects shows that there is a strict relation between the two auxiliaries \emph{have} and \emph{be} which can be captured in terms of incorporation of a preposition/determiner as proposed by Kayne.}, Author = {Poletto, Cecilia}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 10:37:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-11 10:38:32 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--48}, Title = {Double auxiliaries, anteriority and terminativity}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Bayer:2009, Abstract = {The topic of hte follwing article is an exceptiona use of the negative quantifier \emph{nothing} and its correspondents in German, Dutch and Italian in which this element turns out to act like a negative polarity item (NPI). The circumstance under which this is the case have very briefly been describedin Bayer (2006). \emph{Nothing} is interpreted like an NPI whenever it is not licensed as an argument. Closer inspection reveals that adjunct status alone is too corase a distinciton, and that \emph{nothing} must in fact be associated with the structural object position of the verb. The article is organized as follows. Section 1 presents that key observation using English data. Sections 2, 3, and 4 present constructted as well as attested data from English, German and Dutch respectively. Sectin 5 contains considerations of argument structures which trigger the interpretation of \emph{nothing} as an NPI. Section 6 presents the core account. Section s7 ketches a diachronic scenario. Section 8 turns to negative concord and expandst he account to Italian data. Section 9 contains a conlcusion.}, Author = {Bayer, Josef}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 10:33:18 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-11 10:33:54 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {1}, Pages = {5--30}, Title = {Nominal negative quantifiers as adjuncts}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Conroy:2009, Abstract = {We demonstrate a U-shaped developmental trajectory in the interpretation of scopally ambiguous sentences, with 4-year-olds and adults, but not 5-year-olds, accessing inverse scope. These results argue against any view that treats 5-year-olds failures as resulting from immaturity of a single mechanism. Instead, we propose that this developmental pattern derives from the development of (a) parsing mechanisms that generate multiple interpretations in addition to (b) processes involved in selecting or revising among these.}, Author = {Conroy, Anastasia and Lidz, Jeffrey and Musolino, Julien}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 09:51:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-11 09:52:54 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {2}, Pages = {106--117}, Title = {The Fleeting Isomorphism Effect}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Valois:2009, Abstract = {This article examines noun-drop constructions in French-speaking children. French being intermediate between English (which rarely allows noun-drop) and Spanish (which freely allows it) with respect to the richness of their respective morphological systems, it provides a fertile testing ground for various agreement-based analyses of noun-drop. We conclude, along with Snyder, Senghas, & Inman (2001) that agreement is not a factor in the licensing of these constructions. Moreover, limitations on the occurrence of this phenomenon (i.e., not all adjective types allow it) in French lead us to propose that semantic, rather than syntactic, factors are responsible for noun-drop in French, i.e., partitivity and atomization (in the sense of Bouchard 2002). This in turn assigns the determiner a more important role than had previously been assumed in the licensing of noun-drop. Ultimately, our analysis illustrates how child language can be used to discriminate between competing analyses of a given syntactic process.}, Author = {Valois, Daniel and Royle, Phaedra}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 09:49:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-11 09:51:19 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {2}, Pages = {82--105}, Title = {Partitivity, Atomization, and Noun-Drop: A Longitudinal Study of {F}rench {C}hild Language}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Syrett:2009, Abstract = {We show that 4-year-olds assign the correct interpretation to antecedent-contained deletion (ACD) sentences because they have the correct representation of these structures. This representation involves Quantifier Raising (QR) of a Quantificational Noun Phrase (QNP) that must move out of the site of the verb phrase in which it is contained to resolve a case of verb phrase ellipsis. Furthermore, not only do children provide clear justifications for such sentenceswith ACD, but they treat ACD sentences differently from sentenceswith coordinated conjunction, a plausible alternative if they lacked QR. The findings have implications for the interpretation of experimental results in which children appear to lack this grammatical operation, and instead point to extragrammatical factors as the source of this pattern.}, Author = {Syrett, Kristen and Lidz, Jeffrey}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 09:45:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-09-26 17:48:18 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {2}, Pages = {67--81}, Title = {{QR} in {C}hild {G}rammar: Evidence from Antecedent-Contained Deletion}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @book{Repp:2009, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Repp, Sophie}, Date-Added = {2009-05-11 09:40:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-11 09:42:55 -0400}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Series = {Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics}, Title = {Negation in Gapping}, Year = {2009}} @book{Johnson:2008d, Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom}, Date-Added = {2009-05-08 12:20:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-08 12:21:38 -0400}, Editor = {Johnson, Kyle}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Title = {Toics in Ellipsis}, Year = {2008}} @article{Ross:1970a, Author = {Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:53:06 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:52:19 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {363--366}, Title = {A Note on {I}mplicit {C}omparatives}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Culicover:1970, Author = {Culicover, Peter}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:51:08 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-01 20:51:45 -0600}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {366--369}, Title = {One More Can of Beer}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Perlmutter:1970c, Author = {Perlmutter, David M.}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:49:56 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:52:35 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {187--255}, Title = {Surface {S}tructure {C}onstraints in Syntax}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Lakoff:1970a, Author = {Lakoff, George and Ross, John Robert}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:48:41 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-31 11:49:33 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {271--272}, Title = {Two Kinds of \emph{And}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Akmajian:1970a, Author = {Akmajian, Adrian}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:47:34 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2010-04-06 14:52:57 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {149--168}, Title = {On Deriving {C}left Sentences from {P}seudo-{C}left Sentences}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Bolinger:1970, Author = {Bolinger, Dwight}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:46:17 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-01 20:46:56 -0600}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {140--144}, Title = {The Meaning of Do So}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @article{Postal:1970, Author = {Postal, Paul M.}, Date-Added = {2009-05-01 20:42:57 -0600}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-01 20:43:56 -0600}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {37--120}, Title = {On the Surface Verb `Remind'}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1970}} @phdthesis{Gibson:1991, Address = {Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania}, Author = {Gibson, Edward}, Date-Added = {2009-04-29 10:57:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-04-29 10:59:12 -0400}, School = {Carnegie Mellon University}, Title = {A Computational Theory of Human Linguistic Processing: Memory Limitations and Processing Breakdown}, Year = {1991}} @inproceedings{Yoon:2005, Author = {Yoon, James Hye Suk and Lee, Wooseung}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics}, Date-Added = {2009-04-17 07:46:14 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-04-17 07:50:57 -0500}, Editor = {Alderete, John and Han, Chung-hye and Kochetov, Alexei}, Pages = {379--387}, Title = {Conjunction Reduction and its Consequences for {N}oun {P}hrase Morphosyntax in {K}orean}, Volume = {24}, Year = {2005}} @article{Burge:1973, Author = {Burge, Tyler}, Date-Added = {2009-04-14 17:28:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-04-14 17:29:16 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Philosophy}, Pages = {425--439}, Title = {Reference and proper names}, Volume = {70}, Year = {1973}} @article{Kratzer:2009, Abstract = {This article argues that natural languages have two binding strategies that create two types of bound variable pronouns. Pronouns of the first type, which include local fake indexicals, reflexives, relative pronouns, and PRO, may be born with a ``defective'' feature set. They can acquire the features they are missing (if any) from verbal functional heads carrying standard -operators that bind them. Pronouns of the second type, which include long-distance fake indexicals, are born fully specified and receive their interpretations via context-shifting -operators (Cable 2005). Both binding strategies are freely available and not subject to syntactic constraints. Local anaphora emerges under the assumption that feature transmission and morphophonological spell-out are limited to small windows of operation, possibly the phases of Chomsky 2001. If pronouns can be born underspecified, we need an account of what the possible initial features of a pronoun can be and how it acquires the features it may be missing. The article develops such an account by deriving a space of possible paradigms for referential and bound variable pronouns from the semantics of pronominal features. The result is a theory of pronouns that predicts the typology and individual characteristics of both referential and bound variable pronouns.}, Author = {Kratzer, Angelika}, Date-Added = {2009-04-14 14:54:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-05-14 12:25:16 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {2}, Pages = {187--237}, Title = {Making a Pronoun: Fake Indexicals as Windows into the Properties of Pronouns}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @incollection{Johnson:2009, Author = {Johnson, Kyle}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of hte 2007 Workshop in {G}reek Syntax and Semantics at {MIT}}, Date-Added = {2009-04-09 08:31:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-04-09 08:33:07 -0400}, Editor = {Halpert, Claire and Hartman, Jeremy and Hill, David}, Pages = {409--424}, Publisher = {MIT Working Papers in Linguistics}, Title = {{PEPPER} and {PF} Movement: Reactions to {Y}amashita}, Volume = {57}, Year = {2009}} @incollection{Bjerre:2008, Address = {Lund, Sweden}, Author = {Bjerre, Tavs and Engels, Eva and J{\o}rensen, Henrik and Vikner, Sten}, Booktitle = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian {S}yntax 82}, Date-Added = {2009-03-21 14:00:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-21 14:01:48 -0400}, Pages = {131--166}, Publisher = {Center of Language and Literature}, Title = {Points of convergence between functional and formal approaches to syntactic analysis}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Hrafnbjargarson:2008, Abstract = {In this paper, the distributin of modals in Icelandic `that'-clauses is explored. It will be shown that the presence of certain modals overturns restrictions on root transformations and extraction. Based on this finding, the paper makes two claims (i) the size of the left periphery is constant irrespectiv of selectional properties of matrix verbs, and (ii) the observed differences between root and non-root environments arise from a differene in how much of hte left periphery of the complement clause is part of the matrix predicate itself. The presence of modals decreases the amount of structure available to the matrix verb.}, Address = {Lund, Sweden}, Author = {Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn}, Booktitle = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian {S}yntax 82}, Date-Added = {2009-03-21 13:56:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-21 13:58:12 -0400}, Pages = {103--130}, Publisher = {Center of Language and Literature}, Title = {Liberalizaing modals and floating clause boundaries}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Brandtler:2008a, Abstract = {This paper is an attempt to solve the somewhat elusive polarity item licensing properties of wh-questions in Swedish. As has been observed by Klima (1964) for English, NPIs are generally not compatible with genuinely information seeking wh-questions, but tend to induce rhetorical interpretations. Distinguishing between thre types of wh-questions and the kind of information they request, I will systematically review the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of each wh-type. Based on that overview, I argue that NPI-licensing in wh-questions is dependent on the relation bewteen teh implication of existence associated with the wh-word and the presupposition induced by the expressed proposition. According to my analysis, wh-words shouldnot be regarded as NPI-licensing operators, Being place-holders, wh-words inherit whatever properties are associated with the item they replace. The licensing property of the wh-word is thus dependent on the licensing property of the referent. Thus, only wh-words referring to downward entailing expressions will license NPIs in their scope (e.g. when pointing to an empty set). Such wh-questions tend to be interpreted rhetorically.}, Address = {Lund, Sweden}, Author = {Brandtler, Johan}, Booktitle = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian {S}yntax 82}, Date-Added = {2009-03-21 13:51:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-21 13:56:37 -0400}, Pages = {83--102}, Publisher = {Center of Language and Literature}, Title = {Why we should ever bother about sh-questions. On the {NPI}-licensing properties of wh-questions in {S}wedish}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Hroarsdottir:2008, Abstract = {Older Icelandic had various word order patterns with verb particles, including both pre- and postverbal particles. The most frequent patterns in the attested corpus show a preverbal particle and a postverbal direct object, or a preverbal particle and a preverbal direct object. In the earilest texts, dating fom the fourteenth centry, preverbal particles are preferred over postverbal particles, although both pre- and postverbal particles co-exist in the corpus for several centuries. In this paper, we will show how a small clause analysis of verb particles, together with a remnant VP movement framework (Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir 2000) can account for the attested orders of verb particles in the history of Icelandic.}, Address = {Lund, Sweden}, Author = {Thorbj{\"o}rg Hr{\'o}arsd{\'o}ttir}, Booktitle = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian {S}yntax 82}, Date-Added = {2009-03-21 13:46:22 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-21 13:48:28 -0400}, Pages = {43--81}, Publisher = {Center of Language and Literature}, Title = {Verb particles in {OV}/{VO} word order in {O}lder {I}celandic}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Lohndal:2008, Abstract = {In this paper we investigate how copulas are to be analyzed within a framework assuming a predicaion prhase (PrP). It is discussed in the literature whether copulas move from a verb phrase to the predication phrase, or whether they are directly merged in the predication phrase. We present arguments in favor of both views and conclude that both options have to be allowed by Univesal Grammar. We discuss the claim that copulas have semantic content in relation to our analysis, and we furtehr discuss the consequences for our analysis of an important difference between predication mediated by copulas and `` pure'' non-verbal predication, as to the licensing of argument positions.}, Address = {Lund, Sweden}, Author = {Lohndal, Terje and Nyg{\aa}rd, Mari and {\AA}farli, Tor A.}, Booktitle = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian {S}yntax 82}, Date-Added = {2009-03-21 13:38:10 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-21 13:44:06 -0400}, Pages = {23--41}, Publisher = {Center of Language and Literature}, Title = {The structure of copular clauses in {N}orwegian}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Gelderen:2008, Abstract = {In this paper we present a new way to analyze the development of double definiteness in Norwegian. Instead of analyzing the emergence of double definiteness as a change of the status of the definite marker, we propose that double definiteness emerges due to a different ordering of adjectives in Old Norxe nd Modern NOrwegian respectively. This, we claim, has several advantages, among others because it allows us to account for certain movement differences between Old Norse and Modern Norwegian, whch have proven difficult to handle. It also means that hte change in question can be reconciled with a forma approach to grammaticalization, where this change represents an instance of the Late Merge Principle.}, Address = {Lund, Sweden}, Author = {Gelderen, Elly van and Lohndal, Terje}, Booktitle = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian {S}yntax 82}, Date-Added = {2009-03-21 13:33:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-21 13:37:08 -0400}, Pages = {1--22}, Publisher = {Center of Language and Literature}, Title = {The position of adjectives and double definiteness}, Year = {2008}} @article{Toosarvandani:2009, Abstract = {In this paper, I introduce a novel ellipsis construction from Farsi, v-stranding VPE, in which part of a complex predicate goes missing, leaving behind the light verb. Under an analysis of complex predicates where the light verb is the overt realization of v, this type of ellipsis can be construed as deletion of the complement of v. I give evidence that this phenomenon patterns with English verb phrase ellipsis (VPE) in a number of important respects. The same licensing conditions that must be satisfied in English VPE, including an inflectional checking requirement and an antecedence condition, must also be satisfied in Farsi v-stranding VPE.}, Author = {Toosarvandani, Maziar}, Date-Added = {2009-03-09 16:21:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-09 16:23:16 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {60--92}, Title = {Ellipsis in {F}arsi Complex Predicates}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Sobin:2009, Abstract = {Case in English is ``dormant''---not valued or resolved in the syntax---unless it is ``activated'' by the EPP feature of T. Case-activated DPs move to Spec,TP for Case valuation. Further extraction (e.g., wh-movement) of subjects requires ``phase-early'' Case resolution, guaranteeing that the uninterpretable Case feature of a subject is resolved early, in Spec,TP, in compliance with the Earliness Principle. An inability to resolve an active Case feature early results in the C-t effect. The dormant ``object'' case form is determined at PF either by a rule of default case (accusative) or by one of a set of rules assigning a prestige (usually nominative) case. This system correctly predicts a variety of details of the C-t effect and the possible occurrence and distribution of prestige case forms (It is I or between you and I ) where Case is dormant. The C-t effect in Spanish, Russian, and Polish are also briefly considered.}, Author = {Sobin, Nicholas}, Date-Added = {2009-03-09 16:18:08 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-09 16:20:50 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {32--59}, Title = {Prestige {C}ase Forms and the {C}omp-trace Effect}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Brattico:2009, Abstract = {In many languages, case is distributed among many grammatical elements inside of argument DPs. This article shows that case distribution in Finnish is sensitive to certain nontrivial structural properties of those DPs. This makes it possible to use case distribution as a tool to investigate the internal structure of a variety of DPs, including nominalized clauses. It is argued, based on such new evidence, that (i) there exists a syntactic nominalizer head n within various kinds of nominal phrases, and that (ii) genitive argument DPs of nominalized clauses undergo raising analogous to the EPP-triggered DP raising in finite clauses. Furthermore, these genitive arguments are base-generated below the nominalizer head n. Implications involving recent theories of Agree, valuation, and phrasal movement are discussed.}, Author = {Brattico, Pauli and Leinonen, Alina}, Date-Added = {2009-03-09 16:15:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-09 16:17:02 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--31}, Title = {Case Distribution and {N}ominalization: Evidence from {F}innish}, Volume = {12}, Year = {2009}} @article{Grinstead:2008, Abstract = {In this study, we investigate whether specific language impairment (SLI) manifests itself grammatically in the same way in Spanish and English with respect to nominal plural marking. English-speaking children with SLI are very proficient at marking plural on nouns. Spanish has two main nominal plural allomorphs: /s/ and /es/. The /es/ allomorph has received multiple theoretical treatments, including one (e.g., Harris (1991)) which argues that in singular-plural pairs such as flor-flores, the /e/ is epenthetic, while other accounts (e.g., Colina (2003)) argue that synchronically there is an underlying /e/ in the singular form (e.g., flore) which gets deleted by apocope. Child Spanish speakers with SLI in the United States have shown mixed results in their abilities to learn plural marking. They have shown low proficiency on an elicited production task, but have shown high proficiency in spontaneous production data. We show, using a new elicited production task in Mexico with a group of children diagnosed with SLI and two control groups, that performance is close to the high levels previously shown in spontaneous production studies. Further, we show that all children's performance with the epenthetic allomorph /es/ is worse than their performance with the canonical allomorph /s/. Our results suggest that plural marking is not an axis of cross-linguistic variation between Spanish and English among children with SLI. On the basis of the absence of child errors of the flore type and presence of errors of the flors type, our data appear to support the epenthesis account of Harris (1991).}, Author = {Grinstead, John and Cant{\'u}-S{\'a}nchez, Myriam and Flores-{\'A}valos, Blanca}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:46:25 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:48:32 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {329--349}, Title = {Canonical and Epenthetic Plural Marking in {S}panish-Speaking Children with {S}pecific {L}anguage {I}mpairment}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hohle:2009, Abstract = {This article investigates the acquisition of the focus particle auch 'also' by German-learning children. We report data from spontaneous and elicited production of utterances with the focus particle auch by 1- to 4-year-olds complementing earlier findings of a delayed production of the unaccented auch compared to the accented one. But in contrast to previous studies showing that children have problems interpreting sentences with accented and unaccented auch, we found indications for adult-like comprehension in an eye-tracking experiment by children from 3 years on. These results reflect early availability of adult-like linguistic competence with respect to both auch-variants which does not always lead to adult-like performance. This variation in children's performance across tasks is considered to be due to additional modality and task specific constraints. Development in this area thus reflects not a change in underlying knowledge, but rather a change in the constraints on its behavioral manifestation.}, Author = {H{\"o}hle, Barbara and Berger, Frauke and M{\"u}ller, Anja and Schmitz, Michaela}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:38:27 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:40:45 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {36--66}, Title = {Focus Particles in {C}hildren's Language: Production and Comprehension of \emph{Auch} `Also' in {G}erman Learners from 1 Year to 4 Years of Age}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Kim:2009, Abstract = {This study investigates the potential incomplete acquisition of binding interpretations in Korean-English bilinguals by asking whether and how the majority language of these bilinguals (English) influences their family or heritage language (Korean), especially when exposure to and use of English starts very early. The experiment tested the long-distance and local interpretations of different Korean anaphors---caki, casin, and caki-casin---by 51 Korean-English bilinguals raised in Korean-speaking families residing in the United States (22 early bilinguals and 29 late bilinguals) together with a control group of 34 Korean monolinguals residing in Korea. Overall results indicated that the bilinguals maintain the distinction between local and long-distance anaphors, though not to the same degree as monolinguals. There was a tendency among early bilinguals to choose more local binding overall compared to the late bilinguals and Korean monolinguals. At the individual level, many early bilinguals failed to differentiate between caki-casin and casin in terms of binding distance, treating both as local anaphors, whereas monolinguals and late bilinguals tended to collapse caki and casin, treating both as long distance anaphors}, Author = {Kim, Ji-Hye and Silvina, Montrul and Yoon, James}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:35:43 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:37:19 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {3--35}, Title = {Binding Interpretations of Anaphors by {K}orean Heritage Speakers}, Volume = {16}, Year = {2009}} @article{Mushin:2008, Abstract = {Data from dual pronoun systems in Australian languages is used to show the pragmatic basis for a cycle of pronoun creation---reduced pronouns from free forms and free from reduced---and the motivation to maintain both types in a linguistic system. Free pronouns become positionally restricted reduced forms by association of clause-initial position with discourse prominence (Swartz 1988, Choi 1999). The same pragmatic motivations result in the creation of new free pronouns, and the divergence of free and reduced pronouns with respect to ergative case marking. Examples of languages at different stages of the cycle include Garrwa (one set of free pronouns, with a strong preference for second position); Djambarrpuyngu and Gupapuyngu (two sets of pronouns transparently related in form and in complementary distribution); Ritharrngu, Djinang, and Djinba (two sets of pronouns transparently related in form but in which the reduced pronouns are becoming obligatory); Warlpiri (two sets of pronouns, which diverge in form, and the reduced set is obligatory); and Warumungu (one set of reduced pronouns, indicating how new free pronouns might emerge based on information-packaging principles). The creation of free pronouns from reduced pronouns argues against strict unidirectionality of change.}, Author = {Mushin, Ilana and Simpson, Jane}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:27:55 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:29:59 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {3}, Pages = {566--596}, Title = {Free to Bound to Free? Interactions between Pragmatics and Syntax in the Development of {A}ustralian Pronominal Systems}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Brown:2008, Abstract = {In Walman, a language in the Torricelli family spoken in Papua New Guinea, there are two words that have the function of conjoining noun phrases but that have the morphology of transitive verbs, exhibiting subject agreement with the first conjunct and object agreement with the second conjunct. We discuss two interrelated issues concerning these words: (i) Do these words behave syntactically like conjunctions in other languages, in combining with two noun phrases to form a single noun phrase, or are they really just verbs in a serial verb construction?, and (ii) Do these words have a meaning that is closer to a coordinative conjunction like and in English, or do they have a comitative meaning like English with? We show that the evidence on the first of these questions is somewhat contradictory, but that even in cases where the syntactic evidence argues that these verbs do not combine with two noun phrases to form a single noun phrase, they still have a meaning closer to that of and than of with.}, Author = {Brown, Lea and Dryer, Matthew S.}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:25:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:27:21 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {3}, Pages = {528--565}, Title = {The Verbs for `And' in {W}alman, a {T}orricelli Language of {P}apua {N}ew {G}uinea}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{McConnell-Ginet:2008, Abstract = {Why do people care about the meaning(s)/significance associated with a word? Does it make sense to advocate or to criticize a certain form-meaning association? This article argues that words do real cognitive and social work as they are deployed in social practice and that it is primarily through words and their histories of use that culture links to language. It is not semantic representations as such that matter but the (mostly extralinguistic) reference and conceptual baggage words acquire in their discursive world travels. Lexical significance shifts and is contested as part of shifting and contested customs, institutions, and ideologies.}, Author = {McConnell-Ginet, Sally}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:24:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:25:08 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {3}, Pages = {497--527}, Title = {Words in the World: How and Why Meanings Can Matter}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Gahl:2008, Abstract = {Frequent words tend to shorten. But do homophone pairs, such as time and thyme, shorten equally if one member of the pair is frequent? This study reports an analysis of roughly 90,000 tokens of homophones in the Switchboard corpus of American English telephone conversations, in which it was found that high-frequency words like time are significantly shorter than their lowfrequency homophones like thyme. The effect of lemma frequency persisted when local speaking rate, predictability from neighboring words, position relative to pauses, syntactic category, and orthographic regularity were brought under statistical control. These findings have theoretical implications for the locus of frequency information in linguistic competence and in models of language production, and for the role of articulatory routinization in shortening.}, Author = {Gahl, Susanne}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:21:37 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:23:36 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {3}, Pages = {474--496}, Title = {\emph{Time} and \emph{Thyme} are not Homophones: The Effect of Lemma Frequency on Word Durtations in Spontaneous Speech}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Shapiro:2008, Author = {Shapiro, Michael}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:19:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:20:16 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {4}, Pages = {815--819}, Title = {Is an icon iconic?}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Anderson:2008, Abstract = {The object of inquiry in linguistics is the human ability to acquire and use a natural language, and the goal of linguistic theory is an explicit characterization of that ability. Looking at the communicative abilities of other species, it becomes clear that our linguistic ability is specific to our species, undoubtedly a product of our biology. But how do we go about determining the specifics of this Language faculty? There are two primary ways in which we infer the nature of Language from the properties of individual languages: arguments from the POVERTY OF THE STIMULUS, and the search for universals that characterize every natural language. Arguments of the first sort are not easy to construct (though not as difficult as sometimes suggested), and apply only to a tiny part of Language as a whole. Arguments from universals or typological generalizations are also quite problematic. In phonology, morphology, and syntax, factors of historical development, functional underpinnings, and limitations of the learning situation, among others, conspire to compromise the explanatory value of arguments from observed crosslinguistic regularities. Confounding the situation is the likelihood that properties found across languages as a consequence of such external forces have been incorporated into the Language faculty evolutionarily through the BALDWIN EFFECT. The conflict between the biologically based specificity of the human Language faculty and the difficulty of establishing most of its properties in a secure way cannot, however, be avoided by ignoring or denying the reality of either of its poles.}, Author = {Anderson, Stephen R.}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:16:42 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:18:56 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {4}, Pages = {795--814}, Title = {The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Plag:2008, Abstract = {It is generally assumed that noun-noun compounds in English are stressed on the left-hand member (e.g. courtroom, watchmaker). However, there is a large amount of variation in stress assignment (e.g. silk tie, Madison Avenue, singer-songwriter) whose significance and sources are largely unaccounted for in the literature. This article presents a study in which three kinds of factors held to play a role in compound stress assignment are tested: argument structure, lexicalization, and semantics. The analysis of 4,353 noun-noun compounds extracted from the Boston University Radio Speech Corpus shows that there is indeed a considerable amount of variation in stress assignment. Overall, semantics turns out to have the strongest effect on compound stress assignment, whereas an approach relying on argument structure is much less successful in predicting compound stress. The article presents for the first time large-scale empirical evidence for the assumption that lexicalization has an effect on compound stress assignment. The article also makes a methodological contribution to the debate in showing that (and how) corpus-based studies using acoustic measurements can shed new light on the issue of variable compound stress.}, Author = {Plag, Ingo and Kunter, Gero and Lappe, Sabine and Braun, Maria}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:10:27 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:15:56 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {4}, Pages = {760--794}, Title = {The Role of Semantics, Argument Structure, and Lexicalization in Compound Stress Assignment in {E}nglish}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Dunn:2008, Abstract = {Using various methods derived from evolutionary biology, including maximum parsimony and Bayesian phylogenetic analysis, we tackle the question of the relationships among a group of Papuan isolate languages that have hitherto resisted accepted attempts at demonstration of interrelatedness. Instead of using existing vocabulary-based methods, which cannot be applied to these languages due to the paucity of shared lexemes, we created a database of STRUCTURAL FEATURES---abstract phonological and grammatical features apart from their form. The methods are first tested on the closely related Oceanic languages spoken in the same region as the Papuan languages in question. We find that using biological methods on structural features can recapitulate the results of the comparative method tree for the Oceanic languages, thus showing that structural features can be a valid way of extracting linguistic history. Application of the same methods to the otherwise unrelatable Papuan languages is therefore likely to be similarly valid. Because languages that have been in contact for protracted periods may also converge, we outline additional methods for distinguishing convergence from inherited relatedness.}, Author = {Dunn, Michael and Levinson, Stephen C. and Lindstr{\"o}m, Eva and Reesink, Ger and Terrill, Angela}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:07:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:10:06 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {4}, Pages = {710--759}, Title = {Structural Phylogeny in Historical Linguistics: Methodological Explorations Applied in {I}sland {M}elanesia}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Langendoen:2008, Abstract = {Chomsky (1959a) presented an algorithm for constructing a finite transducer that is strongly equivalent to a Chomsky-normal-form context-free grammar for all sentences generated by that grammar with up to any specified finite degree of center embedding. This article presents a new solution using a variety of COORDINATE GRAMMAR to assign nonembedding (paratactic) structures strongly equivalent to those assigned by an embedding grammar, which can in turn be directly computed by a finite transducer. It proposes that the bound on center embedding is really a consequence of a bound on alternation between right and left embedding, called here ZIGZAG EMBEDDING. Coordinate grammars can also be used to assign on embedding structures equivalent to those with up to any specified finite degree of coordinate embedding (the occurrence of a coordinate structure as a member of a coordinate structure of the same type). It concludes that coordinate grammars or the finite transducers strongly equivalent to them are psychologically real, and that the existence of a finite bound on the degree of zigzag and coordinate embedding is a consequence of the increasing size and complexity of such grammars or transducers as the bound increases.}, Author = {Langendoen, D. Terence}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 12:03:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 12:06:34 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {4}, Pages = {691--709}, Title = {Coordinate Grammar}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Stepanov:2009, Author = {Stepanov, Arthur and Stateva, Penka}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:57:00 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:58:29 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {176--185}, Title = {When {QR} Disobeys Superiority}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Coon:2009, Author = {Coon, Jessica}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:55:07 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:56:31 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {165--175}, Title = {Interrogative Possessors and the Problem with Pied-Piping in {C}hol}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Caponigro:2009, Author = {Caponigro, Ivano and Pearl, Lisa}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:53:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:54:44 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {155--164}, Title = {The Nominal Nature of Where, When, and How: Evidence from Free Relatives}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Gribanova:2009, Abstract = {I point out that the generally accepted theory of single-pair versus pair-list readings for multiple wh-questions in the Slavic family, as instantiated in Boskovic 2001a, predicts the wrong result for Russian multiple wh-questions and for coordinated multiple wh-questions in several languages. I suggest a reformulation of the connection between the structure and the interpretation of multiple wh-questions that relies on the structural adjacency of two or more wh-items at LF, and I discuss a number of cases in which this reformulation appears to make the right predictions for multiple wh-questions containing clitics.}, Author = {Gribanova, Verga}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:51:15 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:52:41 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {133--154}, Title = {Structural Adjacency and the Typology of Interrogative Interpretations}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Bobaljik:2009, Abstract = {A rich literature on Icelandic syntax has established that infinitival complements of obligatory control verbs constitute a case assignment domain independent from the matrix clause, and in this differ systematically from all types of A-movement, which manifest case dependence/ preservation.As Landau (2003) has observed, these facts provide significant counterevidence to the movement theory of control (Hornstein 1999 and subsequent work). Boeckx and Hornstein (2006a) attempt to defend this theory in light of data from Icelandic.Weoffer here a review of the relevant literature, andweshowthat Boeckx and Hornstein's reply fails on several counts. We further argue that contrary to their claims, PRO in Icelandic receives structural rather than default (nominative) case, leaving the movement theory with no account for the distinction between PRO and lexical subjects.}, Author = {Bobaljik, Jonathan David and Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:49:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-03-10 14:58:38 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {113--132}, Title = {Icelandic {C}ontrol is not {A}-Movement: The Case from Case}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Heck:2009, Abstract = {In this article, I argue that an approach to pied-piping in terms of wh-feature percolation is problematic under minimalist assumptions. I propose an alternative theory based on Agree, arguing that wh-movement and restrictions on pied-piping follow from the interaction of the theory of phases and a violable constraint that forces wh-feature checking under Agree to be as local as possible. I present and derive three observations about pied-piping that are attested in different languages.}, Author = {Heck, Fabian}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:46:47 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:48:01 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {75--111}, Title = {On Certain Properties of {P}ied-{P}iping}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Bejar:2009, Abstract = {We propose that agreement displacement phenomena sensitive to person hierarchies arise from the mechanism of Agree operating on articulated phi-feature structures in a cyclic syntax. Cyclicity and locality derive a preference for agreement control by the internal argument. Articulation of the probe determines (a) when the agreement controller cyclically displaces to the external argument and (b) differences in crosslinguistic sensitivity to person hierarchies. The system characterizes two classes of derivations corresponding empirically to direct and inverse contexts, and predicts the existence and nature of repair strategies in the latter. The properties of agreement displacement thus reduce to properties of syntactic dependency formation by Agree.}, Author = {B{\'e}jar, Susana and Rezac, Milan}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:44:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:46:18 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {35--73}, Title = {Cyclic Agree}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Aboh:2009, Abstract = {This article argues that in V1-XP-V2 and V1-V2-XP series, V1 merges in the functional domain of the lexical verb (V2). V2 introduces the (internal) argument and is embedded under an AspP whose head is endowed with an EPP feature. Surface word order variations in Kwa (and Khoisan) result from the EPP licensing that triggers V2-object inversion, sometimes followed by V2 movement past the shifted object.}, Author = {Aboh, Enoch Olad{\'e}}, Date-Added = {2009-02-19 11:41:59 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-19 11:42:57 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--33}, Title = {Clause Structure and Verb Series}, Volume = {40}, Year = {2009}} @article{Hall:2008, Abstract = {The contrast between Middle High German (MHG) [s] and [esh] was consistently neutralized to the latter sound after [r] in many modern German dialects, e.g., MHG 'kirse'> New High German 'Kirsche' (cherry). It will be argued that this sound change was a dissimilation of the distinctive feature [high] and that this dissimilation was triggered by an independently motivated OCP constraint banning adjacent consonants with the same value of [high]. Alternative analyses in which the shift from [rs] to [r-esh] is analyzed as a dissimilation of soem other feature or as the assumilation f some property will be refuted. The present study also addresssed the actuation problem: Why did [rs] shift after [r-esh] in this particular language at this particular time? It will be argued that the structural questions that arise in explaining the [rs]>[r-esh] shift (e.g., Why did [s] shift after [r] but not after other sounds?) as well as specific questions pertaining to the actuation problem derive straightforward answers by considering the phonological system of Middel High German. In particular, one needs to consider the features of Middel High German that were distinctive and which of those distinctive features were active phonologically.}, Author = {Hall, T. A.}, Date-Added = {2008-12-30 15:22:18 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-30 15:27:23 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {213--248}, Title = {Middle {H}igh {G}erman [rs] > [r\textipa{S}] as height dissimilation}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Gergel:2008, Abstract = {By capitalizing on insight gained from the syntax of early English, comparative inversion reveals itself as a simpler process than is standardly assumed, viz. simpler than moving the finite verbal element to the C-domain in conjunction with subject movement to Spec,TP. An archaic option in the grammar allows the subject to stay in a lower position than the canonically assumed specifier of the inflectional domain and n head movement to C is invoked. The proposal complements recent findings regarding the diachrony of V2 in English together with its ditinct derivaiton from classical V2 in Germanic. Together with the core analysis of inversion in comparatives, the article illustrates further areas in which beneficial conseuqences for comparatives are derived form the structure proposed, such as the persistence of certain subjectless comparative structures.}, Author = {Gergel, Remus}, Date-Added = {2008-12-30 15:17:32 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-30 15:19:13 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {191--211}, Title = {Comparative inversion: a diachronic study}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Rappaport:1992, Address = {New York, New York}, Author = {Rappaport Hovav, Malka and Levin, Beth}, Booktitle = {Syntax and Semantics 26: Syntax and the Lexicon}, Date-Added = {2008-12-26 12:17:19 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-26 12:26:08 -0500}, Editor = {Stowell, Tim and Wehrli, Eric}, Pages = {127--153}, Publisher = {Academic Press}, Title = {\emph{-er} Nominals: Implications for a Theory of Argument Structure}, Year = {1992}} @book{Roelofsen:2008, Address = {University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam}, Author = {Roelofsen, Floris}, Date-Added = {2008-12-16 11:19:40 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-16 11:21:05 -0500}, Publisher = {Institute for Logic, Language and Computation}, Title = {Anaphora Resolved}, Year = {2008}} @article{Safir:2008, Abstract = {This essay argues that antecedent-anaphor and bound-variable relations (coconstrual realtions) are formed outside narrow syntax by an interpretive component that exploits the structures built by minimalist architecture. It is demonstrated that attempts to reduce coconstrual to the tree-building operations of narrow syntax (Agree, feature theory, Merge and its subcase, Remerge) do not succeed in dispensing with conditions that evaluate constructed trees and thus such accounts offer no conceptual advantage. Instead it is established that syntactically sensitive coconstrual relations must be interpreted from the output of narrow syntax, but are not expressed within narrow syntax at all. This result unburdens narrow syntax of a class of relations that bring theoretical and empirical complications, while providing a more relegant account of coconstrual in a broader conception of the interpretive interface.}, Author = {Safir, Ken}, Date-Added = {2008-12-16 11:09:34 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-16 11:10:08 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {330--355}, Title = {Coconstrual and Narrow Syntax}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Quicoli:2008, Abstract = {This article provides evidence based on the phenomenon of reconstruction asymmetry in English, and anaphoric clitics in Romance to show that binding conditions -- more specifically condition A -- apply cyclically on the basis of information contained at te level of the syntactic phase. Given that cyclicity is a property of derivations, the facts analyzed here constitute evidence in favor of an essentially ``derivational'' approach to binding relations based on the central concept of syntactic phase. Evidence is also presented against LF analyses, which assume a ``representational'' approach to binding, and against an alternative derivaitonal approach, which assumes that binding principles apply at arbitrary points in the syntactic derivation.}, Author = {Quicoli, A. Carlos}, Date-Added = {2008-12-16 11:05:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-16 11:06:37 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {299--329}, Title = {Anaphora by Phase}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Lee-Schoenfeld:2008, Abstract = {The central issue addressed here is syntactic locality, and the main proposal is that movement and anaphoric relations are governed by a unified concept of locality. The specific phenomena to be investigated are (i) infinitive constructions, in particular ACI complements, (ii) the German Possessor Dative Construction (PDC), with a dative nominal playing the role of both possessor and affectee, and (iii) binding, the conditions under which reflexive and nonreflexive pronouns may occur. The focus is mainly on binding and how to account for instances of noncomplementarity, but also on the PDC, which can be analyzed as possessor raising. Ultimately, it will become clear that the unifying prinicple of locality must be the phase, and that phasehood determines the transparency/opacity of phrases for both movement and anaphoric relations. }, Author = {Lee-Schoenfeld, Vera}, Date-Added = {2008-12-16 10:27:04 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-16 11:02:45 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {281--298}, Title = {Binding, Phases, and Locality}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hicks:2008, Abstract = {This article argues that the relegation of the binding theory to the C-I interface (LF) is theoretically undersirable and empirically unwarranted. Recent minimalist research has sought to eliminate the binding theory from UG by reducing its conditions to narrow-syntactic operations (Hornstein 200, 2006; Reuland 2001, 2006; Kayne 2002; Zwart 2002, 2006; Hicks 2006). This approach remains controversial since the canonical minimalist binding theory (Chomsky 1993; Chomsky and Lasnik 1993) views the binding conditions as interpretive reules applying at LF, supported by evidence that condition A interacts with other interpretive phenomena assumed to be determined at LF (Lebeaux 1998; Fox and Nissenbaum 2004). While the interaction of anaphor binding and scope relations in particular is not disputed, I show that it is attributable to factors outside the binding theory, namely the requirement that variables (including anaphors) must be c-commanded by their binders at LF. Deprived of its strongest empirical argument, the LF binding theory can then be picked apart.}, Author = {Hicks, Glyn}, Date-Added = {2008-12-16 10:21:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-12-16 10:22:53 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {255--280}, Title = {Why the Binding Theory Doesn't Apply at {LF}}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Unsworth:2008, Abstract = {Previous research suggests that children's behavior with respect to the interpretation of indefinite objects in negative sentences may differ depending on the target langauge: whereas young English-speaking children tend to select a surface scope interpretation (e.g. Musolino (1998)), young Dutch-speaking children consistently prefer an inverse scope interpretation (e.g. Kramer (2000)). In this article, we suggest that these data arenot as puzzling as they first appear. Extending a proposal put foward by Hulsey, Hacquard, Fox, and Gualmini (2004), we show that both English- and Dutch-speaking children's behavior can be explained in the same way: children selct the interpretation that answers the contextually relevant question.}, Author = {Unsworth, Sharon and Gualmini, Andrea and Helder, Christina}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:49:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:51:08 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {315--328}, Title = {Children's Interpretation of Indefinites in Sentences Containing Negation: A Reassessment of the Cross-linguistic Picture}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Rothman:2008, Abstract = {Coupling a review of previous studies on the acquisition of grammatical aspects undertaken from contrasting paradigmatic views of second langauge acquisition (SLA) with new experimental data from L2 Portuguese, the present study contributes to theis specific literature as well as general debates in L2 epistemology. We tested 31 adult English learners of L2 Portuguese across three experiments, examining the extent to which they ahd acquired the syntax and semantics of gramamtical aspect. Demonstrating that many individuals acquired target knowledge of what we contend is a poverty-of-the-Stimulus semantic entailment related to the checking of aspectual features encoded in Portuguese preterit and imperfect morphology (see also Goodin-Mayeda and Rothman (2007), Montrul and Slabakova (2003), Slabakova and Montrul (2003)), namly an +-accidental distinction that obtains in a restricted subset of contexts,w e conclude that UG-based approaches to SLA are in a better position to tap and guage underlying morphosyntactic competence, since based on independent theoretical linguistic descriptions, they make falsifiable predictions that are amenable to empirical scrutiny, seek to describe and explian beyond performance,and canaccount for L2 convergence on poverty-of-the-stimulus knowledge as well as L2 variability/optionality .}, Author = {Rothman, Jason and Iverson, Michael}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:43:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:48:37 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {270--314}, Title = {Poverty-of-the-Stimulus and {SLA} Epistemology: Considering {L2} Knowledge of Aspectual Phrasal Semantics}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Duffield:2008, Abstract = {This article is concerned with the proper characterization of subject omission at a particular stage in German child language. It focuses on post-verbal null subjects in finite clauses, here termed Rogues. It is argued that hte statistically significant presence of Rogues, in conjunciton with their distinct developmental profile, speaks against a Strong Continuity approach to the acquisition of null subject knowledge in German, and urges a reconsidertaiton of the notion of Optionality in early grammars. The signifcance of the Rogues stage is considered in teh context of specific theoretical proposals about argument omission: those of Rizzi (1992; 1994; 200), and of Wexler (1994; 1998), are contrased with the Weak Continuity approach proposed by Clahsen and his associates (e.g., Slahsen (1990/1991), Clahsen and Penke (1992), Clahsen, Eisenbeiss, and Penke (1996)). The data presented here, which complement related work by Hamann (1996), provide additional empirical support for these latter hypotheses.}, Author = {Duffield, Nigel}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:39:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:39:51 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {4}, Pages = {225--269}, Title = {Roots and Rogues in {G}erman Child Language}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Paterson:2005, Abstract = {We report 3 studies investigating children's and adults' interpretation of ambiguous focus in sentences containing the focus-sensitive quantifier only. In each experiment, child and adult participants compared sentences with only in a preverbal position and counterpart sentences without only against a series of pictures depicting events that matched or mismatched with the sentence meaning. The sentences with only were ambiguous between an analysis with contrastive focus assigned to the verb phrase (VP) and one with contrastive focus assigned to the direct object. The results indicate that both children and adults interpreted sentences with only as excluding the possibility of events that formed a contrast with VP constituents. Children also appeared to interpret sentences without only as excluding the possibility of these events despite the absence of grammatical cues that might indicate contrastive focus. We consider these results in relation to a processing account of focus interpretation (Crain, Ni, and Conway (1994)).}, Author = {Paterson, Kevin B. and Liversedge, Simon P. and White, Diane and Filik, Ruth and Jaz, Kristina}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:30:37 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:32:55 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {253--284}, Title = {Children's Interpretation of Ambiguous Focus in Sentences with ``Only''}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2005/2006}} @article{Papafragou:2005, Abstract = {On the standard, neo-Gricean view, most is semantically lower bounded but may give rise to the meaning ``not all'' through scalar implicature (Horn (1972)). More recent proposals have claimed that most does not generate a scalar implicature but is semantically both lower and upper bounded (Ariel (2004; in press)). In this article, we investigate the interpretation of most experimentally to evaluate these competing semantic and pragmatic accounts. We focus on a comparison of most and half because, on the classical view, half and other exact determiners should admit bilateral interpretations more readily than the upward-oriented most (Horn (in press)); however, no such difference should exist if most is both lower and upper bounded. We find that (i) in nonbiasing contexts, adults are more likely to treat most as being compatible with all than half ; (ii) a similar asymmetry emerges in children's interpretations of the two determiners; and (iii) adults adjust the higher boundary of the interpretation of most according to context-driven expectations. Taken together, these results support the classical, lower bounded, semantic analysis of most over recent revisions. Our findings also raise important issues about children's initial conjectures about scalar quantifiers and the development of the semantics--pragmatics interface.}, Author = {Papafragou, Anna}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:25:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:28:35 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {207--251}, Title = {\emph{Most} Wanted}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2005/2006}} @article{Brooks:2005, Abstract = {Errors involving universal quantification are common in contexts depicting sets of individuals in partial, one-to-one correspondence. In this article, we explore whether quantifier-spreading errors are more common with distributive quantifiers each and every than with all. In Experiments 1 and 2, 96 children (5- to 9-year-olds) viewed pairs of pictures and selected one corresponding to a sentence containing a Universal quantifier (e.g., Every alligator is in a bathtub). Both pictures showed extra objects (e.g., alligators or bathtubs) not in correspondence, with correct sentence interpretation requiring their attention. Children younger than 9 years made numerous errors, with poorer performance in distributive contexts than collective ones. In Experiment 3, 21 native, English-speaking adults, given a similar task with the distributive quantifier every, also made childlike errors. The persistence of quantifier-spreading errors in adults undermines accounts positing immature syntactic structures as the error source. Rather, the errors seemingly reflect inaccurate syntax to semantics mapping, with adults and children alike resorting to processing shortcuts.}, Author = {Brooks, Patricia J. and Sekerina, Irina}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:23:06 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:24:53 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {177--206}, Title = {Shortcuts to Quantifier Intrpretation in {C}hildren and {A}dults}, Volume = {13}, Year = {2005/2006}} @article{Anderson:2007, Abstract = {In this article I provide evidence that despite frequently cited differences between child first language (L1) and adult second language (L2) speakers in overt behavior (performance) during grammatical development, the nature, source, and limits of implicit knowledge (competence) in native and second language grammars are equivalent (i.e., they share a common epistemology; Schwartz (1986)). Evidence for this claim comes from the intuitions of L1 English-speaking classroom learners of French with respect to two properties of the French nominal system, both of which are posited to be the surface manifestations of a single parametric option for noun movement within a D(eterminer) P(hrase). These include (i) the distinction between result and process nominals in the licensing of postnominal genitives and (ii) the distinction between prenominal and postnominal adjective position in the context of unique versus nonunique noun referents. An analysis of the results of an acceptability judgment task administered to 100 university-level learners, 27 native French speakers, and 30 native English-speaker controls demonstrated that particular interpretive asymmetries associated with these properties, although underdetermined in the input and not syntactically instantiated in English, nonetheless appeared in the interlanguage grammars of the study participants. Moreover, changes in learner response patterns by level were highly suggestive of a developmental path involving an initial English-like parse of the test sentences followed by a parametric shift at the 3rd-year level, leading to increasingly more native-like intuitions at later levels wherein both properties cluster together. Such results call into question the need for theories of L2 acquisition positing selective transfer, selective impairment, or both at the level of syntactic representation.}, Author = {Anderson, Bruce}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 14:14:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:16:06 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {2}, Pages = {165--214}, Title = {Learnability and Parametric Change in the Nominal System of {L2} {F}rench}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2007}} @article{Sprouse:2008a, Author = {Sprouse, Jon}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:59:16 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:00:23 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {686--694}, Title = {The Differential Sensitivity of Acceptability Judgments to Processing Effects}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Spector:2008, Author = {Spector, Benjamin}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:57:30 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:58:47 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {678--694}, Title = {An Unnoticed Reading for Wh-Questions: Elided Answers and Weak Islands}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Bouma:2008, Author = {Bouma, Gerlof and de Hoop, Helen}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:55:49 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:57:06 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {669--677}, Title = {Unscrambled Pronouns in {D}utch}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Romero:2008, Abstract = {Montague's analysis of the well-known temperature paradox poses a problem for Gupta's syllogism, whose surface syntax differs from that of the temperature syllogism by the addition of the intensional adverb necessarily. Lasersohn (2005) argues that the puzzle arising from these syllogisms can be solved if one adopts the Fregean presuppositional treatment of definite descriptions, and he concludes that the temperature-Gupta puzzle provides an argument in favor of such treatment. This article shows that the analysis of definite descriptions is in fact orthogonal to the puzzle. Instead, the differences between the two syllogisms turn out to stem from the temporal interpretation of their premises.}, Author = {Romero, Maribel}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:53:55 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:55:13 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {655--667}, Title = {The Temperature Paradox and Temporal Interpretation}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Citko:2008, Abstract = {This article offers a critical examination of De Vries's (2006) account of appositive relatives, which treats appositive relatives and nominal appositions alike and assimilates both to coordinate structures. Its main focus is on the following properties of appositive relatives: (a) the category of the appositive head, (b) the case of the appositive head, (c) relative pronoun selection, (d) extraction phenomena, (e) the typology of specifying coordinators, and (f) the lack of prenominal appositives. It examines these properties from both an empirical and a theoretical perspective, contrasting De Vries's account with a version of an adjunction account.}, Author = {Citko, Barbara}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:51:55 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:53:36 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {633--655}, Title = {An Argument against Assimilating Appositive Relatives to Coordinate Structures}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Baker:2008, Abstract = {The Ibibio language displays an antiagreement effect (AAE), in which phi -feature agreement on the verb is suppressed in subject questions, even when the wh-phrase remains in situ. I discuss why this fact is problematic for existing theories of the AAE. I then suggest that the AAE arises when the deletion process that applies to copies in a movement chain removes the -features of a copy along with its semantic features. This formulation applies equally well to overt and covert whmovement. It also generalizes to explain why quantified subjects do not trigger an AAE in Ibibio, whereas subjects in negative clauses do.}, Author = {Baker, Mark C.}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:48:35 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:50:48 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {615--632}, Title = {On the Nature of the {A}ntiagreement Effect: Evidence from Wh-in-situ in {I}bibio}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kennedy:2008b, Abstract = {Morphoprosodic Alignment (MPA) is a nontemplatic model of reduplication designed to account for languages with multiple reduplicative subpatterns. The premise of MPA is that reduplicative morphemes can be stem-internal or stem-external and that this distinction is visible to the phonological component through general constraints on the association of stem-internal and stem-external morphemes to prosodic categories. I illustrate the model with Moronene, Klamath, and Gooniyandi, each of which has several reduplicative morphemes. MPA meets the challenge for an optimality-theoretic model to account for such systems without resorting to morpheme-specific indexed constraints or cophonological constraint hierarchies.}, Author = {Kennedy, Robert}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:44:51 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:46:07 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {589--614}, Title = {Evidence for Morphoprosodic Alignment in Reduplication}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hoop:2008, Abstract = {Two strategies of case marking in natural languages are discussed. These are defined as two violable constraints whose effects are shown to converge in the case of differential object marking but diverge in the case of differential subject marking. The discourse prominence of the case-bearing arguments is shown to be of utmost importance for case-marking and voice alternations. The analysis of the case-marking patterns that are found crosslinguistically is couched in a bidirectional Optimality Theory analysis.}, Author = {Hoop, Helen De and Malchukov, Andrej L.}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:42:22 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:47:37 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {565--587}, Title = {Case-Marking Strategies}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Cardinaletti:2008, Abstract = {We argue that preverbal and postverbal subject clitics in northern Italian dialects are the same lexical items. The different forms of proclitics and enclitics can be explained phonologically (i.e., by phonological constraints ranked in a particular order) and by the hypothesis that morphologically neutral vowels may be inserted in final position (what we call morphological epenthesis). The distributional differences in the paradigm derive from a competition between overt clitics and null subjects that is resolved in an intricate way across sentence types and across dialects and that depends on the interaction of clitic and verb movement and on Minimize Structure.}, Author = {Cardinaletti, Anna and Repetti, Lori}, Date-Added = {2008-11-09 13:39:52 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 13:41:58 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {4}, Pages = {523--563}, Title = {The Phonology and Syntax of Preverbal and Postverbal Subject Clitics in {N}orthern {I}talian Dialects}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @inproceedings{Johnson:2006, Address = {Leiden, The Netherlands}, Author = {Johnson, Kyle}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Console {XV}}, Date-Added = {2008-10-18 16:44:26 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-10-18 16:49:06 -0400}, Editor = {Constantinescu, Camelia and Schoorlemmer, Erik}, Pages = {91--108}, Title = {Copies}, Url = {http://www.sole.leidenuniv.nl}, Year = {2006}, Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.sole.leidenuniv.nl}} @unpublished{Peters:1981, Author = {Peters, Stanley and Ritchie, Robert W.}, Date-Added = {2008-09-16 10:08:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-16 10:08:57 -0400}, Month = {December}, Note = {unpublished paper, Stanford University}, Title = {Phrase Linking Grammars: Draft Only}, Year = {1981}} @article{Ura:1998, Author = {Ura, Hiroyuki}, Date-Added = {2008-09-08 18:28:37 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 18:29:23 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Analysis}, Number = {1}, Pages = {67--88}, Title = {Checking, economy, and copy-raising in {I}gbo}, Volume = {28}, Year = {1998}} @inproceedings{Rogers:1971, Address = {Chicago}, Author = {Rogers, Andy}, Booktitle = {Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the {C}hicago {L}inguistic {S}ociety}, Date-Added = {2008-09-08 18:19:53 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 18:21:56 -0400}, Organization = {Chicago Linguistics Society}, Pages = {206--222}, Publisher = {University of Chicago}, Title = {Three kinds of physical perception verbs}, Year = {1971}} @inproceedings{Potsdam:2001, Author = {Potsdam, Eric and Runner, Jeffrey T.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of {CLS}}, Date-Added = {2008-09-08 18:07:40 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 18:08:53 -0400}, Title = {Richard returns: {C}opy {R}aising and its implications}, Year = {2001}} @incollection{Riemsdijk:1989, Address = {Dordrecht}, Author = {Riemsdijk, Henk van}, Booktitle = {Dialectal Variation and the Theory of Grammar}, Date-Added = {2008-09-08 16:35:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 16:37:12 -0400}, Editor = {Beninc{\`a}, Paola}, Pages = {105--136}, Publisher = {Foris Publications}, Title = {Movement and Regeneration}, Year = {1989}} @incollection{Maling:1982, Address = {Dordrecht, Holland}, Author = {Maling, Joan and Zaenen, Annie}, Booktitle = {The Nature of Syntactic Representation}, Date-Added = {2008-09-08 14:41:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 14:43:28 -0400}, Editor = {Jacobson, Pauline and Pullum, Geoffrey K.}, Pages = {229--282}, Publisher = {D. Reidel Publishing Company}, Title = {A Phrase Structure Account of {S}candinavian Extraction Phenomena}, Year = {1982}} @inproceedings{Perlmutter:1972, Address = {Chicago, Illinois}, Author = {Perlmutter, David M.}, Booktitle = {The {C}hicago Which Hunt: Papers from the Relative Clause Festival}, Date-Added = {2008-09-08 10:02:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 10:06:15 -0400}, Editor = {Peranteau, Paul M. and Levi, Judith N. and Phrares, Gloria C.}, Organization = {Chicago Linguistics Society}, Pages = {73--105}, Publisher = {University of Chicago}, Title = {Evidence for Shadow Pronouns in {F}rench Relativization}, Year = {1972}} @incollection{Fanselow:2002, Author = {Fanselow, Gisbert and {\'C}avar, Damir}, Booktitle = {Theoretical Approaches to Universals}, Date-Added = {2008-09-05 12:34:31 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-08 16:49:37 -0400}, Editor = {Alexiadou, Artemis}, Pages = {65--107}, Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company}, Title = {Distributed Deletion}, Year = {2002}} @book{Boeckx:2003b, Author = {Boeckx, Cedric}, Date-Added = {2008-09-05 11:18:41 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-09-05 11:21:19 -0400}, Publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company}, Title = {Islands and {C}hains: Resumption as Stranding}, Year = {2003}} @article{Brandtler:2008, Author = {Brandtler, Johan}, Date-Added = {2008-08-25 10:46:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-25 10:47:18 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {79--97}, Title = {On the Structure of {S}wedish Subordinate Clauses}, Volume = {81}, Year = {2008}} @article{Heinat:2008, Author = {Heinat, Fredrik}, Date-Added = {2008-08-25 10:45:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-25 10:46:32 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {65--77}, Title = {Long object shift and agreement}, Volume = {81}, Year = {2008}} @article{Josefsson:2008, Author = {Josefsson, Gunl{\"o}g}, Date-Added = {2008-08-25 10:44:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-25 10:45:43 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {29--64}, Title = {Pancakes and peas --- on apparent disagreement and (null) light verbs in {S}wedish}, Volume = {81}, Year = {2008}} @article{Sigurdhsson:2008, Author = {Sigur{\dh}sson, Halld{\'o}r {\'A}rmann and Maling, Joan}, Date-Added = {2008-08-25 10:42:09 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-25 10:43:29 -0400}, Journal = {Working Papers in {S}candinavian Syntax}, Pages = {1--27}, Title = {Argument drop and the {E}mpty {L}eft {E}dge {C}ondition}, Volume = {81}, Year = {2008}} @article{Watanabe:2000, Abstract = {This paper claims (a) that the formal features of the goal are copied onto the probe in the Agree operation, contra Chomsky 2000 and more in line with Chomsky 1998, and (b) that formal features copied onto the probe during the Agree operation participate in binding in a selective way, contra Lasnik 1999. These claims are supported by a modification of Zwart's (1993, 1997) analysis of complementizer agreement and a minimalist reworking of Finer's (1984, 1985) theory of switch reference. It will also be shown that formal features deleted during Agree will not be carried anymore when the category containing them undergoes further movement. This assumption plays a key role in providing an account of complementizer agreement more constrained than Zwart's.}, Author = {Watanabe, Akira}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:42:54 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:43:45 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {159--181}, Title = {Feature Copying and Binding: Evidence from Complementizer Agreement and Switch Reference}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Kitahara:2000, Abstract = {This paper advances Epstein et al.'s (1998) derivational approach with a new proposal that an NP gets interpreted upon the checking of its Case feature in the course of a derivation. As a consequence of this proposal, an inclusiveness-violating aspect of Chomsky's (1995) system is shown to be eliminable.}, Author = {Kitahara, Hisatsugu}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:41:23 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:42:05 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {151--158}, Title = {Two (or more) Syntactic Categories vs. Multiple Occurrences of One}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Dayal:2000, Author = {Dayal, Veneeta}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:40:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:41:01 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {182--185}, Title = {Review of ``Economy and Semantic Interpretation''}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Merchant:2000b, Author = {Merchant, Jason}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:39:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:39:58 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {144--150}, Title = {Antecedent-Contained Deletion in Negative Polarity Items}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Hornstein:2000a, Author = {Hornstein, Norbert}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:38:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:39:14 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {129--143}, Title = {On {A}-Chains: A Reply to {B}rody}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Carnie:2000b, Abstract = { In this article, an underdetermined theory of phrasality is presented, in which bar level plays no role with respect to the rest of the grammar. Evidence for this comes from mismatches in bar level and behavior in Irish and Tagalog nonverbal predication structures, Irish construct state nominals, and Persian nominals. }, Author = {Carnie, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:36:46 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:37:51 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {59--106}, Title = {On the Definition of \obar{X} and {XP}}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Boskovic:2000, Abstract = { This paper investigates the status of across-the-board (ATB) dependencies in Logical Form (LF), taking the standard ATB movement analysis as the point of departure. It is argued that, although both overt and covert wh-movement are subject to the Coordinate Structure Constraint (CSC), only overt ATB movement can save possible CSC violations. This observation implies that there are no LF ATB dependencies at all---an unexpected result under the ATB movement analysis of the ATB construction. The conclusion is further supported by facts of Quantifier Raising and scope, as well as head movement. The paper then examines other approaches to the ATB construction, and argues that the null-operator analysis is able to capture the lack of LF ATB dependencies in a more principled way than alternative analyses. The paper also provides evidence for the existence of QR and LF wh-movement in English and examines the status of VP-coordination. It is argued that VP-level coordination is not possible in nonperiphrastic constructions.}, Author = {Bo{\v{s}}kovi{\'c}, {\v{Z}}eljko and Franks, Steven}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:34:27 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:35:53 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {107--128}, Title = {Across-the-Board Movement and {LF}}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Nunes:2000, Abstract = {This paper attempts to provide a minimalist analysis of CED effects (see Huang 1982) in terms of derivational dynamics in a cyclic system. Assuming Uriagereka's (1999) Multiple Spell-out system, we argue that CED effects arise when a syntactic object K that is required at a given derivational step has become inaccessible to the computational system at a previous derivational stage, when the chunk of structure containing K was spelled out. Assuming Nunes's (1995, 1998) analysis of parasitic gaps in terms of sideward movement, we argue that standard parasitic gap constructions do not exhibit CED effects because K manages to move to a different derivaitonal workspace before the structure containing it is spelled out. Finally, we provide an account of the cases where parasitic gap constructions appear to show CED effects by relying on cyclic access to the numeration, along the lines proposed by Chomsky (1998).}, Author = {Nunes, Jairo and Uriagereka, Juan}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:29:42 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:30:27 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {20--43}, Title = {Cyclicity and Extraction Domains}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Kayne:2000b, Author = {Kayne, Richard S.}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:27:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:29:23 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {44--51}, Title = {On the Left Edge in {UG}: A Reply to {M}cCloskey}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Cheng:2000a, Abstract = {This article examines French wh-in-situ. We argue that wh-in-situ in French is licensed by an intonation morpheme, which also licenses yes/no questions. Movement of a Q-feature of an in-situ wh-word is required to disambiguate the underspecified intonation morpheme. The underspecification nature of this intonation morpheme leads to limited distribution of French wh-in-situ. We further compare French wh-in-situ with Chinese and Portuguese, showing that wh-in-situ in different languages can in fact have different properties.}, Author = {Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen and Rooryck, Johan}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:24:29 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:25:46 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--19}, Title = {Licensing \emph{Wh}-in-situ}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2000}} @article{Sauerland:1999a, Abstract = {This paper corroborates the interpretability proposal of Chomsky (1995) with evidence from scrambling in Japanese and German. First it is shown that scrambling in Japanese is semantically vacuous, whereas scrambling in German is semantically contentful. Chomsky's proposal then predicts that the feature driving Japanese scrambling is erased after checking, while the corresponding feature in German remains visible, specifically for the Shortest Attract condition. Looking at patterns of movement that result in overlapping paths, this prediction is seen to be correct.}, Author = {Sauerland, Uli}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:16:12 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:16:59 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {161--188}, Title = {Erasability and Interpretation}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{McCloskey:1999, Abstract = {This paper examines rightward positioning phenomena in Irish and looks particularly at their interaction with the focusing particle fe in. It uses that interaction as a probe to distinguish among three theoretical options for explaining such right-edge phenomena.}, Author = {McCloskey, James}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:14:34 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:16:01 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {189--209}, Title = {On the Right Edge in {I}rish}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{Brody:1999, Abstract = {There are two main arguments in ``Movement and chains'' (Hornstein 1998) against chains --- one based on the correlation of quantifier scope and binding, the other on the correlation between quantifier scope and thematic properties. Both rest on highly dubious background assumpti ons. Addi tionally, even grant i ng these assumptions, both arguments are flawed in similar ways. There are numerous additional problems both with H's account of quantifier scope and control and with his arguments against chains. If we take chains to be interpretively constructed, then multiple copies in chains may not differ from other multiple occurrences of lexical items (or structures constructed from lexical items) with respect to their origin. In all cases, multiple occurrences are due to a (set of) element(s) being selected from the lexicon more than once. Multiple occurrences can then be interpreted as chains when they are in the (thematically) appropriate type of identity relation. This approach not only dispenses with syntax-internal chains, as H justifiably desires, but also eliminates the additional unmotivated, arbitrary, and redundant syntactic mechanism of movement that he (and the minimalist framework in general) assumes.}, Author = {Brody, Michael}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:12:55 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:13:49 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {3}, Pages = {210--226}, Title = {Relating Syntactic Elements. Remarks on {N}orbert {H}ornstein's ``Movement and Chains''}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{Progovac:1999, Abstract = {I argue that reinforcement of the conjunction and with the correlative both has a precise and consistent semantic effect on the event structure: assignment of two separate (theta-) roles to the conjuncts, which gives rise to the interpretation of two grammatically encoded events/states. This effect is argued not to be the property of the meaning of the lexical item both itself but a computational property of the number of overt heads associated with coordination. Roughly put, multiplicity of events is encoded syntactically, in fact iconically, by an increased number of conjunction markers. I argue that the effect eventually follows from Economy of Pronunciation, a principle independently needed in the grammar. These event considerations are argued to be encoded in the structural representation of coordination.}, Author = {Progovac, Ljiljana}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:10:00 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:11:08 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {141--159}, Title = {Events and Economy of Coordination}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{Fernandez-Soriano:1999, Abstract = {This paper gives further support for the claim that the EPP feature in T and phi-features agreement/nominative Case assignment can be fulfilled by different elements. Some Spanish impersonal sentences will be analyzed that contain predicates selecting for a locative or dative as an external argument. The predicates under study are of two types: stative and eventive. The existential verb haber (which incorporates a locative clitic in the present tense verbal morphology) belongs to the first type. The verbs suceder, ocurrir, `to happen', as well as meteorological verbs, belong to the second class. Data regarding word order, idiom formation, existential interpretation, raising, extraction from coordinate structures, and nominalization show that with these impersonal predicates the locative/dative PPs behave as real subjects, and contrast with those which appear in locative-inversion constructions, which involve anteposition of an internal argument. It will be shown that these arguments bear quirky Case and are generated in the highest node in the extended VP projection. }, Author = {Fern{\'a}ndez-Soriano, Olga}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:07:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:09:01 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {101--140}, Title = {Two Types of Impersonal Sentences in {S}panish: Locative and Dative Subjects}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{Christie:1999, Abstract = {This paper introduces two techniques, CD analysis and Monte Carlo simulation, for the graphical representation and statistical analysis of linguistic data. These techniques were developed in the context of L2 Universal Grammar (UG) research on the acquisition of reflexives in order to address two problems: the difficulty of applying traditional correlation measures to more than two data groups, and the limitations of statistical techniques when faced with small sample sizes. These previously unused tools within the research arena of applied linguistics were found to be flexible as well as easy to use and interpret. They also take advantage of recent advances in data-visualization software for the PC. By visualizing and analyzing the emergence of two or more linguistic properties in the interlanguage grammar, these techniques enable the researcher to address the question of whether or not multiple properties associated with one UG parameter or principle emerge in the interlanguage grammar in a manner or sequence consistent with those principles and parameters.}, Author = {Christie, Katrien N. and Christie, Phillip}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:05:14 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:06:31 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {80--100}, Title = {Gambling on {UG}: The Application of {M}onte {C}arlo Computer Simulation to the Analysis of {L2} Reflexives}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{Bejar:1999, Abstract = {This paper exami nes Multiple Case Checking (MCC) in raising constructions in light of minimalist Case theory and an interpretive view of vocabulary insertion. In general, Case theory excludes the option of a chain receiving more than one Case. However, certain constructions arguably demonstrate that this is possible. We present a range of MCC phenomena, showing that they are incompatible with early insertion models. Inherent Case examples, such as in Icelandic, are accounted for by markedness. For structural Case examples we present an analysis in which both Case assignment and Case checking are utilized. We account for aspects of English, Norwegian, and Niuean MCC using two parameters: whether or not Case features move along with NPs, and whether or not PF accesses whole chains.}, Author = {Bejar, Susana and Massam, Diane}, Date-Added = {2008-08-09 10:03:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-09 10:03:57 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {65--79}, Title = {Multiple Case Checking}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1999}} @article{Takahashi:2008a, Abstract = {In Haitian Creole the lexical item 'ki' shows up when a subject (but not an object) undergoes operator movement in wh-qustions, clefts, and relative clauses. We argue that 'ki' is a phonological reflex of agreement between the complementizer and a wh-phrase. More specifically, the complementizer is spelled out as 'ki' if all its features are checked off by a single goal. We demonstrate that this accomplished only when the operator is a subject.}, Author = {Takahashi, Shoichi and Gra{\v{c}}anin-Yuksek, Martina}, Date-Added = {2008-08-08 12:59:32 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-08 13:00:18 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {223--250}, Title = {Morphosyntax of Movement Dependencies in {H}aitian {C}reole}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hornstein:2008, Abstract = {This paper discusses perception and causative verbs in English and European Portuguese within Chomsky's (2000, 20001) Agree famework and provides an answer for the old riddle of why these verbs appear to select for different infinitival complements in their active and passive forms. Assuming that infinitival clauses are Case-bearing projections (Raposo 1987, Nunes 1995), the paper proposes that in active structures, the infinitival head and the embedded subject can both agree with the matrix light verb and so ``share" the accusative Case it licenses. In passive tructures, on the other hand, the interveneing phi-features of the participial head block the agreeemnt between the finite T and the infinitival head, which will then be licensed only if preposition insertion is sanctioned as a Last Resort repair strategy.}, Author = {Hornstein, Norbert and Martins, Ana Maria and Nunes, Jairo}, Date-Added = {2008-08-08 12:55:03 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-08 12:56:32 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {198--222}, Title = {Perception and Causative Structures in {E}nglish and {E}uropean {P}ortuguese: $\phi$-Feature Agreement and the Distribution of Bare and Prepositional Infinitives}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Cole:2008, Abstract = {Toba Batak displays a variety of properties that typologically rare: (1) the predominant word order is V-O-S-IO and V-O-S-Adv. (2) Extraction of direct objects/ passive agents (by relativization, etc.) is ungrammatical, but subjects, IOs, and adverbials can be extracted. (3) In Toba Batak anaphoric binding, the active subject can bind a passive subject. We argue that these facts are explained by an analysis in which V-O-S-IO order is derived by VP-raising and in which the passive agent is an argument, generated as the specifier of vP rather than as an adjunct. Furthermore, the passive subject undergoes optional reconstruction to its base-generated position in VP. We also argue that, although c-command relations among elements of vP are critical, linear order plays no role whatsoever in the base structure. That is, the output of Merge can be unordered lineraly, and it can be shown that all surface word orders in Toba Batak can be derived from various movement rules out of an unordered base. Linear order comes into play only when constituents move out of hte vP to higher functional projections, linear order being simply a by-product of Move.}, Author = {Cole, Peter and Hermon, Gabriella}, Date-Added = {2008-08-08 12:49:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-08 12:50:41 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {144--197}, Title = {{VP} Raising in a {VOS} Language}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Bowers:2008, Abstract = {Hornstein (1999, 2001) proposes a version of the movement theory of control (MTC) in which movement of a DP is driven by the need to ''receive'' a theta-feature of the verb/predicate it merges with. I argue against the use of theta-feaures in sytax on the grounds that they are fundamentally semantic, hence properly belong to the bare output conditions of hte C-I interface. I propose instead a version of the MTC closer in spirit to Bowers (1973/1986, 1981) in which Merge is driven by interpretable or uninterpretable c-selection features of hte standard sort. I then show that, given standard minimalist assumptions, the MTC is not only possible but necessary. I conclude by arguing that the MTC thus formulated supports a purely derivational theory of syntax and interpretation that contains no level of LF.}, Author = {Bowers, John}, Date-Added = {2008-08-08 12:46:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-08 12:46:58 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {125--143}, Title = {On Reducing Control to Movement}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Neeleman:2008, Abstract = {The so-called cartographic approach to discourse-related word-order variation is based on the idea that particular interpretations---say, contrastive focus--- are licensed in the specifier of particular functional projections---say, a focus phrase. In this paper we present arguments against this view based on scrambling in Dutch. We discuss a range of implementations of the cartographic approach and show that they are either too weak, in that they cannot generate all the word orders found in Dutch, or too strong, in that they fail to capture restrictions on scrambling. The alternative we present dispenses with discourse-related functional projections and instead relies on mapping rules that associate syntactic representations with representations in information structure. On this view, scrambling operations derive a syntactic configuration that matches the structural description of a mapping rule that could otherwise not apply. We suggest that it is this interface effect that licenses the marked structures created by scrambling.}, Author = {Neeleman, Ad and Koot, Hans van de}, Date-Added = {2008-08-08 12:24:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-08 12:25:20 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {137--189}, Title = {Dutch scrambling and the nature of discourse templates}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kallulli:2008, Abstract = {This article investigates the syntax and semantics of a construction attested in several varieties of German, in which an indefinite determiner occurs twice (e.g., ein so ein Kerl `a such a guy'). It is argued that this phenomenon, which we refer to as indefinite determiner doubling, is restricted to structures containing a quantificational element, i.e., the elements appearing between the two determiners are quantifiers, providing additional evidence for Matthewson's (Natural Language Semantics, 9: 145--189, 2001) analysis of quantification, according to which a generalized quantifier is created in two steps, crucially involving a DP complement. The top, or `doubling,' determiner operates on this quantificational structure, functioning as a cardinality element. The analysis is extended to indefinite determiner doubling constructions in varieties of English (e.g., a such a man) and to constructions with definite determiner doubling in (some varieties of) German. The micro-variation observed across German (and English) dialects with respect to the presence versus absence of the doubling determiner is confined to the PF-component, whose different properties across the two systems impose a preference, or a choice, for one or the other spell-out form (phonetically overt or phonetically silent). The variation observed with respect to the elements between the two determiners within and across different varieties of German is due to the (re-)analysis of these closed-class elements within different (functional) layers of DP-structure.}, Author = {Kallulli, Dalina and Rothmayr, Antonia}, Date-Added = {2008-08-08 12:21:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-08-08 12:22:40 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Number = {2}, Pages = {95--136}, Title = {The syntax and semantics of indefinite determiner doubling constructions in varieties of {G}erman}, Volume = {11}, Year = {2008}} @article{Yang:1998, Abstract = {In the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995), Merge is a set operation that imposes no intrinsic ordering among its members. However, syntactic structures are linearized into strings of words at PF. This paper proposes that in order for a Merger set to be linearized, its members must be either hierarchically displaced or morphologically fused into a single terminal node. The empirical study focuses on the structure of DP and its linearization in various constructions. It is shown that the Definiteness Effect (DE) can be attributed to the failure to linearize the DP in unaccusatives. The systematic lack of the DE in some languages (Arabic, Hebrew, and Romanian), unexpected in previous analyses, is due to the morphological N-to-D raising (fusion), therefore satisfying the linearization condition. Furthermore, cross-linguistic evidence is given to show that D can be attracted out of DP for feature checking, rendering transitive DP arguments well-formed.}, Author = {Yang, Charles D.}, Date-Added = {2008-07-30 09:14:19 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-30 09:15:05 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {38--64}, Title = {Unordered {M}erge and its {L}inearization}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1998}} @article{Satterfield:1998, Abstract = {This paper articulates a formal solution to the puzzle of child language learnability within the Principles and Parameters-based framework. The language learning (parameter setting) task requires, in principle, that the selection of syntactic knowledge be sufficienlty constrained for the child to arrive at the appropriate target grammar, expending a minimum of computational effort and time. Since previous L1 analyses impose very strict requirements on the learner, solutions are achieved only at a very high cost. Further, not only do the standard accounts frequently contradict fundamental empirical facts of child linguistic development, such as the degree of variability observed in the production of early grammatical structures regardless of input; the accounts also fail to consider a crucial aspect which impacts selection: the young child's innate potential to efficiently acquire multiple languages simultaneously. The primary aim of the current paper is to provide a computational model that demonstrates a ``bilingual universals'' (in the spirit of Roeper 1996) stage of development based on real world data. The proposed model actually reflects a more precise UG-based representation within early monolingual grammars, as well as plausibly accounting for variability found in child L1 grammars}, Author = {Satterfield, Teresa}, Date-Added = {2008-07-30 09:06:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-30 09:10:35 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {1}, Pages = {28--37}, Title = {The `{S}hell {G}ame': Why Children Never Lose}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1998}} @article{Torrego:1998a, Abstract = {In this article I discuss pro and its licensing strategies. I argue that the D-feature postulated by Chomsky (1995) for Tense and v can be realized in a separate head, namely, on a D, which then licenses pro (along the lines of Torrego (1998)). Focusing on nominative subjects in certain infinitival clauses of Catalan, Italian, and Spanish, I propose that their nominative subjects are licensed by a D with ``weak'' agreement features in association with Tense. Expletive pro and argumental pro are discussed and it is proposed that the D that licenses the former has no agreement features, whereas the D that licenses the latter has ``rich'' agreement. A parallel is established between the licensing strategy of ``clitic-doubling'' and the licensing of argumental pro in infinitival clauses.}, Author = {Torrego, Esther}, Date-Added = {2008-07-30 09:02:33 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-30 09:03:22 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {206--219}, Title = {Nominative Subjects and {PRO}-Drop {INFL}}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1998}} @article{Niyogi:1998a, Abstract = {In this article we present new results of a novel computational approach to the interaction of two important cognitive-linguistic phenomena: (1) language learning; and (2) language change over time (diachronic linguistics). We exploit the insight that while language learning takes place at the individual level, language change is more properly regarded as an ensemble property that takes place at the level of populations of language learners. We show by analytical and computer simulation methods that language learning can be regarded as the driving force behind a dynamical systems account of language change. We apply this model to the specific case of historical change from Classical Portuguese to European Portuguese, demonstrating how a particular language learning model coupled with data on the differences between Classical and European Portuguese leads to specific predictions for possible language-change envelopes. The main investigative message of this paper is to show how this methodology can be applied to a specific case, that of ortuguese. The main moral underscores the individual/population difference; we show that simply because an individual will choose a particular grammar does not mean that all other grammars will be eliminated.}, Author = {Niyogi, Partha and Berwick, Robert C.}, Date-Added = {2008-07-30 09:00:20 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-30 09:01:24 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {192--205}, Title = {The Logical Problem of Language Change: A Case Study of {E}uropean {P}ortuguese}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1998}} @article{Hornstein:1998, Abstract = {A line of thought within the Minimalist Program proceeds as follows: the objects interpreted at the interface determine the units of syntactic manipulation. This paper argues that chains are not proper units for determining relative quantifier scope and so should not be thought of as proper syntactic objects. This conclusion is buttressed by the claim that once theta-features are allowed into the theory, a conclusion independently required once control is considered, then chains are redundant objects that can be seen as violating the Inclusiveness Condition. The paper presents a theory that dispenses with chains. This requires syntactic innovations that are examined.}, Author = {Hornstein, Norbert}, Date-Added = {2008-07-30 08:58:06 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-30 08:58:54 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Number = {2}, Pages = {99--127}, Title = {Movement and {C}hains}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1998}} @phdthesis{Engdahl:1980, Address = {Amherst, Massachusetts}, Author = {Engdahl, Elisabet}, Date-Added = {2008-07-28 10:18:30 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-28 10:19:20 -0400}, School = {University of Massachusetts}, Title = {The Syntax and Semantics of Questions in {S}wedish}, Year = {1980}} @article{Tonhauser:2008, Author = {Tonhauser, Judith}, Date-Added = {2008-07-27 10:00:01 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-27 10:20:58 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {2}, Pages = {332--342}, Title = {Defining crosslinguistic categories: The case of nominal tense (Reply to {N}ordlinger and {S}adler)}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Nordlinger:2008, Author = {Nordlinger, Rachel and Sadler, Louisa}, Date-Added = {2008-07-27 09:58:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-27 09:59:50 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {2}, Pages = {325--331}, Title = {When is a termporal marker not a tense? {R}eply to {T}onhauser 2007}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Dobrin:2008, Author = {Dobrin, Lise M.}, Date-Added = {2008-07-27 09:56:35 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-27 09:58:02 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {2}, Pages = {300--342}, Title = {From linguistic elicitation to eliciting the linguist: Lessons in community empowerment from {M}elanesia}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Kwon:2008, Abstract = {The central goal of this article is to propose a systematic description of Differential Funciton Marking (DM) in Korean, a langauge in which both subject and object markers may fail to be spelled out. Taking Aissen's theory of DM (Aissen 2003) as a starting point, we show that althought its predictions seem mostly consisten with the statistical results of corpus-based research on Korean (and Japanese), this model does not accurately account for the Korean data. We argue that subject and object bareness (the lack of a functional particle) regularly correlates with interpretive effects that should be captured in terms of information structure (focus structure). Adapting Erteschik-Shir's (1997, 2007) framework to represent focus-structure, we argue that bare subjects and objects in Korean fail to be visible at this level. Consequently, they may be construed neither as active topics nor as foci, and thus must either be left out of focus-structure or incorporated within larger focus-structure constituents in order to be interpreted. We show that bare objects are never construed as topics or foci and alwas exhibit a form of semantic incorporation, whicle LEUL-marked objects always stand for focus-structre constituents construed as focused at some level. Bare subjects, unlike NEUN-marked topical subjects and GA-marked subjects, can be construed neither as active topics nor as foci, and always occur in tense-deficient clauses construed as thetic and anchored to speech time. We argue that our assumptions correctly predict the results of corpus studies, and we suggest that as regards nominal arguments, F-structure visibility might ultimately stand as the crucial interpretive correlate of Functional positions in syntax.}, Author = {Kwon, Song-Nim and Zribi-Hertz, Anne}, Date-Added = {2008-07-27 09:46:50 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-27 10:14:35 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {2}, Pages = {258--299}, Title = {Differential Function Marking, Case, and Information Structure: Evidence from {K}orean}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Coetzee:2008, Abstract = {In this article, I make two theoretical claims. (i) For some form to be grammatical in a language L, it is not necessary that hte form satisfy all constraints that are active in L; that is, even grammatical forms can violate constraints. (ii) There are degrees of ungrammaticality; that is, not all ungrammatical forms are equally ungrammatical. I first show that these claims follow straightforwardly from the basic architecture of an optimality-theoretic grammar. I then show that the surface sound patterns used most widely in formal phonology cannot be used to test the truth of these two claims, but argue that results from speech processing experiments can. Finally, I discuss three experiments on the processing of nonwords of hte form [stVt], [skVk], and [spVp] in English that were designed to test these claims, and show that both claims are confirmed by the results of the experiments.}, Author = {Coetzee, Andries}, Date-Added = {2008-07-27 09:42:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-27 09:55:57 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Number = {2}, Pages = {218--257}, Title = {Grammaticality and Ungrammaticality in Phonology}, Volume = {84}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hyams:2008, Abstract = {First written in 1986, prior to the many findings concerning the optionality of finiteness and the root infinitive phenomenon, this article attempts to extend the parameter-setting model of grammatical development to the acquisition of inflectional morphology. I propose that the Stem Parameter, which states that a stem is/is not a well-formed word int he langauge, is set early, and that a positive vs. negative setting directly affects the timing and manner in which children acquire inflectional morphemes. Related to this, I propose that the distinction between core and peripheral grammar (Chomsky 1981) provides a complexity metric for grammatical development.}, Author = {Hyams, Nina}, Date-Added = {2008-07-26 11:36:58 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-26 11:37:39 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {192--209}, Title = {The Acquisition of Inflection: A Parameter-Setting Approach}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Sugisaki:2008, Abstract = {The acquisition of word order has been one of the central issues in the study of child language. One striking finding from the detailed investigation of various child langauges is that from the earliest observable stages, children are highly sensitive to the basic word order of their target language. However, the evidence so far comes mainly from the acquisition of rigid word-order languages. In light of this background, this study presents new evidence that such early sensitivity to basic word order can be observed even in the acquisition of Japanese, a free word-order language.}, Author = {Sugisaki, Koji}, Date-Added = {2008-07-26 11:32:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-26 11:33:46 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {183--191}, Title = {Early Acquisition of Basic Word Order in {J}apanese}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Tamburelli:2008, Abstract = {This article argues for a theory of lexical acquisition that takes overgeneralization in monolinguals and syntactic transfer effects in bilinguals to be manifestations of the same underlying mechanism. The theory views both overgeneralization and transfer of epiphenomena of an updating system which spreads newly acquired information across paradigms. A consequence of this setup is that both overgeneralization and transfer effects are only expected to affect members of the same lexical paradigm. Experimental evidence, both old and new, is presented in support of this model.}, Author = {Tamburelli, Marco}, Date-Added = {2008-07-26 11:29:11 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-26 11:30:16 -0400}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {3}, Pages = {130--182}, Title = {The Role of Paradigm Formation in Lexical Acquisition: Towards a Unified Account of Overgeneralization and Transfer Effects}, Volume = {15}, Year = {2008}} @article{Sybesma:2008, Author = {Sybesma, Rint}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:16:04 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:16:45 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {580--587}, Title = {Whether We Tense-Agree Overtly or Not}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Sprouse:2008, Author = {Sprouse, Jon}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:14:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:15:47 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {572--580}, Title = {Rhetorical Questions and \emph{Wh}-Movement}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Richards:2008, Author = {Richards, Marc D.}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:13:24 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:14:24 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {563--572}, Title = {On Feature Inheritance: An Argument from the PHase Impenetrability Condition}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Meinunger:2008, Author = {Meinunger, Andr{\'e}}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:11:36 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:13:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {553--563}, Title = {About Object \emph{es} in the {G}erman Vorfeld}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Hirose:2008, Author = {Hirose, Tomio}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:10:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:11:25 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {548--553}, Title = {Nominal Paths and Head Parameter}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Haddican:2008, Author = {Haddican, Bill}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:08:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:09:49 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {539--547}, Title = {The Structural Deficiency of Verbal Pro-Forms}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Aoun:2008, Abstract = {Three different formal devices have been proposed within minimalism to replace Chomsky's (1993) covert movement of phrasal categories to check Case and agreement: expletive-associate relations (Brody 1995), movement of formal features (Chomsky 1995), and the operation Agree (Chomsky 2000, 2001). We propose that vehicle change effects (in the sense articulated by Fiengo and May (1994)) establish empirical grounds for distinguishing among these alternatives and argue that only the Move F approach can account for the data without enriching the theoretical apparatus.}, Author = {Aoun, Joseph and Nunes, Jairo}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:06:02 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:07:02 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {525--538}, Title = {Vehicle Change Phenomena as an Argument for {M}ove {F}}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Landau:2008, Abstract = {The fact that the specifier of T0 is subject both to the Extended Projection Principle (EPP) and to the Empty Category Principle (ECP) has remained an unexplained accident within Government-Binding Theory. I propose a principled account of this correlation. The EPP is a selectional requirement of functional heads (e.g., T, Top, C) that applies at PF---an instance of p-selection for an overt element. Like all selectional requirements, it applies to the head of the selected phrase, explaining why null heads cannot appear in EPP positions (thus deriving certain representational ECP effects). A wide range of empirical results follow, all unified by the exclusion of null-headed phrases from EPP positions: subject-object asymmetries in the distribution of bare nouns in Romance and sentential complements; failure of certain adjuncts to occur in clause-initial position; resistance of indirect objects to A' -movement; and phonological doubling of heads of fronted categories. I argue against the agreement/checking view of the EPP and show that only the selectional construal allows a natural explanation of its puzzling properties.}, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:02:57 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:04:55 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {485--523}, Title = {{EPP} Extensions}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Aguero-Bautista:2008, Abstract = {This article discusses how the remnant wh-phrase in a sluicing structure ends up in the position where it is pronounced. Finding a parallel between universally quantified interrogatives and sluices with universal quantifiers, with respect to the distribution of pair-list readings, the article shows that quantified interrogatives involving weak islands can have pair-list interpretations that require reconstruction of the wh-phrase to positions that can only be created by successive-cyclic movement, and that the same is true for structurally similar sluices. The article therefore concludes that the remnant wh-phrase in sluicing gets to its surface position via regular successive-cyclic movement.}, Author = {Ag{\"u}ero-Bautista, Calixto}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 16:00:38 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:02:43 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {413--443}, Title = {Diagnosing Cyclicity in {S}luicing}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @article{Fintel:2008, Abstract = {Languages can express the existence of an easy way of achieving a goal in a construction we call the sufficiency modal construction (SMC), which combines a minimizing/exclusive operator like only or ne . . . que and a goal-oriented necessity modal like have to or need to, as in To get good cheese, you only have to go to the North End. We show that the morphosyntactic makeup of the SMC is crosslinguistically stable. We show that the semantics of the construction poses a severe compositionality problem. We solve the problem by giving the negation and the exclusive operator differential scope. For only, this means decomposing it into negation and an exclusive other than component.}, Author = {von Fintel, Kai and Iatridou, Sabine}, Date-Added = {2008-07-22 15:58:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-22 16:00:01 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {445--483}, Title = {Anatomy of Modal Construction}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2008}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Kiss: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.}, 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}} @article{Hayes: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.}, Author = {Hayes, Bruce and Wilson, Colin}, Date-Added = {2008-07-21 07:34:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-07-27 10:13:26 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Number = {3}, Pages = {379--440}, Title = {A Maximum Entropy Model of Phonotactics and Phonotactic Learning}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2008}} @article{Friedmann: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.}, 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}} @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, 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}, 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}} @webpage{Lechner:2007, Author = {Lechner, Winfried}, Date-Added = {2008-07-09 15:45:07 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-09-30 18:21:41 -0400}, Month = {March}, Title = {Interpretive Effects of {H}ead {M}ovement}, Url = {http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/000178}, 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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Dikken:2002b, 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.}, 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}} @article{Bobaljik:2002a, 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.}, 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}} @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:2008a, Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom}, Author = {Johnson, Kyle}, Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis}, Date-Added = {2008-05-28 10:09:49 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-02-07 09:54:45 -0500}, 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 = {Rezac, Milan}, Booktitle = {Phi Theory}, Date-Added = {2008-05-28 09:50:45 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-19 07:29:24 -0500}, 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, 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. }, 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}} @article{Felser: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.}, 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}} @article{Son: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.}, 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}} @article{Mithun: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.}, 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}} @article{Collins: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.}, 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}} @article{Jackendoff: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.}, 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}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Copley: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.}, 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}} @article{Idrissi: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.}, 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}} @article{Elbourne: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.}, 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}} @article{Paul: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.}, 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}} @article{Matushansky: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.}, 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}} @article{Leu: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.}, 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}} @article{Guasti: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.}, 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}} @article{Pirvulescu: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.}, 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}} @article{Corver: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.}, 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}} @article{Roehrs: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.}, 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}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Craenenbroeck:2006a, 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.}, 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}} @article{Citko: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.}, 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}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Harbour: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}, 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}} @article{Stjepanovic:2007, Author = {Stjepanovi\'{c}, Sandra}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:32:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:33:58 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1stjepanovic.pdf}, 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 = {2009-02-09 14:36:26 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1merchant.pdf}, 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 = {2008-01-24 10:30:07 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1mcnally.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {161--169}, Title = {{DP}-Internal \emph{Only}, Amount Relatives, and Relatives Out of Existentials}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{Sobin: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.}, Author = {Sobin, Nicholas}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:27:44 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:28:23 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1sobin.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {147--160}, Title = {\emph{Do So} and {VP}}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{MacDonald: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.}, Author = {MacDonald, Jonathan E.}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:26:18 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:27:05 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1macdonald.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {128--147}, Title = {Domain of Aspectual Interpretation}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{Hazout: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.}, Author = {Hazout, Ilan}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:24:17 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2011-12-21 21:45:27 +0000}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1hazout.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {117--128}, Title = {On the Relation between Expletive \emph{There} and Its Associate: A Reply to {W}illiams}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{Darzi: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.}, Author = {Darzi, Ali}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:22:58 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:23:41 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1darzi.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {103--116}, Title = {On the vP Analysis of {P}ersian Finite Control Constructions}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{Legate:2007a, 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.}, Author = {Legate, Julie Anne}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:21:35 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:22:20 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1legate.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {55--101}, Title = {Morphological and Abstract Case}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{Embick:2007a, 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.}, Author = {Embick, David and Marantz, Alec}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:20:16 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:21:04 -0500}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/39.1embick.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--53}, Title = {Architecture and Blocking}, Volume = {39}, Year = {2007}} @article{Pope: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.}, Author = {Pope, Jennifer and Meyerhoff, Miriam and Ladd, D. Robert}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:16:02 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:17:15 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.3pope.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {615--627}, Title = {Forty years of language change on {M}artha's {V}ineyard}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Fleck: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.}, Author = {Fleck, David W.}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:14:14 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:15:18 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.3fleck.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {589--614}, Title = {Evidentiality and Double Tense in {M}atses}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Sankoff: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.}, Author = {Sankoff, Gillian and Blondeau, H{\'e}l{\`e}ne}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:11:49 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:13:38 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.3sankoff.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {560--588}, Title = {Language Change Across the Lifespan: /r/ in {M}ontreal {F}rench}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Geurts: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.}, Author = {Geurts, Bart and Nouwen, Rick}, Date-Added = {2008-01-24 10:09:48 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2008-01-24 10:11:10 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.3geurts.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {533--559}, Title = {\emph{At Least} et al.: The Semantics of Scalar Modifiers}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Bohnemeyer: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.}, 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 = {2008-01-24 10:08:39 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.3bohnemeyer.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {495--532}, Title = {Principles of Event Segmentation in Language: The Case of Motion Events}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @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 = {2009-12-29 13:44:24 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of East Asian Linguistics}, Number = {3}, Pages = {255--291}, Title = {Subjacency and {S}-structure movement of \emph{wh}-in-situ}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1992}} @article{Broekhuis: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.}, Author = {Broekhuis, Hans}, Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:15:16 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-12-14 12:16:14 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.2Broekhuis.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {109--141}, Title = {Object shift and subject shift}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Ackema: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.}, Author = {Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad}, Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:13:46 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-12-14 12:14:58 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.2Ackeman_Neeleman.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {81--107}, Title = {Restricted pro drop in {E}arly {M}odern {D}utch}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Wiklund: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.}, 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 = {2007-12-14 12:12:27 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.3Wiklund_etal.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {203--233}, Title = {Rethinking {S}candinavian verb movement}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Lodrup: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.}, Author = {L{\o}drup, Helge}, Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:06:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-12-14 12:08:49 -0500}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.3Lodrup.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {183--201}, Title = {A new account of simple and complex reflexives in {N}orwegian}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Hoeksema: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.}, Author = {Hoeksema, Jack}, Date-Added = {2007-12-14 12:04:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-12-14 12:05:53 -0500}, Journal = {Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.3Hoeksema.pdf}, Number = {3}, Pages = {163--182}, Title = {Parasitic licensing of negative polarity items}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @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, 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.}, Author = {Hay, Jennifer and Bauer, Laurie}, Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:15:40 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-19 09:16:59 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.2hay.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {388--400}, Title = {Phoneme inventory and population size}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Labov: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. }, Author = {Labov, William}, Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:13:46 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-19 09:15:21 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.2labov.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {344--387}, Title = {Transmission and Diffusion}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Birner: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.}, Author = {Birner, Betty J. and Kaplan, Jeffrey P. and Ward, Gregory}, Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:11:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-19 09:13:32 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.2birner.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {317--343}, Title = {Functional Compositionality and the Interaction of Discourse Constraints}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Zuraw: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.}, Author = {Zuraw, Kie}, Date-Added = {2007-11-19 09:09:52 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-19 09:11:28 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.2zuraw.pdf}, 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}} @article{Beaver: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.}, 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 = {2007-11-19 09:09:34 -0500}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.2beaver.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {245--276}, Title = {When Semantics Meets Phonetics: Acoustical Studies of Second-Occurrence Focus}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @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 = {2007-11-16 10:07:03 -0500}, Journal = {Lingua}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Lingua/Lingua117(12)_Hernandez.pdf}, Number = {12}, Pages = {2106--2133}, Title = {Gapping as a syntactic dependency}, Volume = {117}, Year = {2007}} @article{Boersma: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.}, Author = {Boersma, Paul}, Date-Added = {2007-11-16 09:57:57 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-16 10:03:47 -0500}, Journal = {Lingua}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Lingua/Lingua117(12)_Boersma.pdf}, Number = {12}, Pages = {1989--2054}, Title = {Some listerner-oriented accounts of h-aspir{\'e} in {F}rench}, Volume = {117}, Year = {2007}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Hyams: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.}, 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}} @article{Pires: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}, Author = {Pires, Acrisio}, Date-Added = {2007-11-05 07:49:10 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-05 07:50:08 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Syntax/Syntax10(2)Pires.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {165--203}, Title = {The Derivation of Clausal Gerunds}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Boeckx:2007, Author = {Boeckx, Cedric and Grohmann, Kleanthes K.}, Date-Added = {2007-11-05 07:46:20 -0500}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-05 07:47:24 -0500}, Journal = {Syntax}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Syntax/Syntax10(2)Boeckx.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {204--222}, Title = {Remark: Putting Phases in Perspective}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Landau: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.}, Author = {Landau, Idan}, Date-Added = {2007-11-02 17:16:25 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-11-02 17:18:47 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Syntax/Syntax10(2)Landau.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {127--164}, Title = {Constraints on Partial {VP}-Fronting}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Mascaro: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.}, 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}} @article{Neeleman: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).}, 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}}} @article{Miyagawa: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.}, 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}} @article{Boskovic:2007, Abstract = {The article proposes a new theory 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 the 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.}, 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}} @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, 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.}, 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}} @article{Bohnacker: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)).}, Author = {Bohnacker, Ute}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-11-09 14:11:52 -0500}, Journal = {Language Acquisition}, Number = {1}, Pages = {31--73}, Title = {On the ``Vulnerability'' of Syntactic Domains in {S}wedish and {G}erman}, Volume = {14}, Year = {2007}} @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, 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.}, Author = {Schneider-Zioga, Patricia}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.2Schneider.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {403--446}, Title = {Anti-agreement, anti-locality and Minimality}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Ormazabal: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.}, Author = {Ormazabal, Javier and Romero, Juan}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.2Ormazabal_Romero.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {315--347}, Title = {The Object Areement Constraint}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Nevins: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.}, Author = {Nevins, Andrew}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.2Nevins.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {273--313}, Title = {The Representation of Third Person and it Consequences for Person-Case Effects}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Gutierrez-Bravo: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.}, Author = {Guti{\`e}rrez-Bravo, Rodrigo}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.2Gutierrez.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {235--271}, Title = {Prominence Scales and Unmarked Word Order in {S}panish}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @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, 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)}, Author = {Ladfoged, Peter}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.1ladefoged01.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {161--180}, Title = {Articulatory Features for Describing Lexical Distinctions}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Alexopoulou: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. }, Author = {Alexopoulou, Theodora and Keller, Frank}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.1alexopoulou.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {110--160}, Title = {Locality, Cyclicity, and Resumption: At the Interface between the Grammar and Human Sentence Processor}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Jager: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.}, Author = {J{\"a}ger, Gerhard}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.1jager.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {74--109}, Title = {Evolutionary Game Theory and Typology: A Case Study}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Bickel: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.}, 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 = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.1bickel.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {43--73}, Title = {Free Prefix Ordering in {C}hintang}, Volume = {83}, Year = {2007}} @article{Corbett: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.}, Author = {Corbett, Greville G.}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Language/83.1corbett.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {8--42}, Title = {Canonical Typology, Suppletion, and Possible Words}, Volume = {83}, 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}, 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 = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.1Tanaka.pdf}, 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 = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*JCGL/10.1Bouma_etal.pdf}, 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 = {talk given Berlin}, Title = {Cyclic Linearization of Shared Material}, Year = {2006}} @unpublished{Bachrach:2007, Author = {Bachrach, Asaf and Katzir, Roni}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-05-20 10:53:38 -0400}, Month = {August}, Note = {unpublished manuscript, {MIT}}, Title = {Right-Node Raising and Delayed Spellout}, Year = {2007}} @unpublished{Frampton:2006, Author = {Frampton, John}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Month = {April}, Note = {talk at Harvard University}, Title = {The remerger theory of movement}, Year = {2006}} @article{Sabbagh:2007, Abstract = {This paper offers a novel solution to an old problem concerning Right Node Raising constructions---namely, that Right Node Raising constructions seem to involve an unbounded application of (Across-the-Board) rightward movement that flies in the face of certain locality constraints on movement generally, as well as the locality constraint on (simple) rightward movement in particular. Despite these apparent challenges, I argue in this paper that RNR constructions are in fact movement derived. I propose that the apparent unbounded nature of the movement involved in RNR follows from the simple fact that rightward movement is actually, in principle, an unbounded type ofmovement. I propose, in addition, to analyze those cases where rightward movement appears to be bounded as the result of a derivational constraint proposed in recent work by Fox and Pesetsky (2004) which demands that certain instances of movement be order preserving.}, Author = {Sabbagh, Joseph}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.2Sabbagh.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {349--401}, Title = {Ordering and Linearizing Rightward Movement}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @incollection{Wilder:2008, Address = {Cambridge, United Kingdom}, Author = {Wilder, Chris}, Booktitle = {Topics in Ellipsis}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2008-05-28 10:17:33 -0400}, Editor = {Johnson, Kyle}, Pages = {229--258}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Title = {Shared Constituents and Linearization}, Year = {2008}} @incollection{Anand:2006, Author = {Anand, Pranav and Nevins, Andrew}, Booktitle = {Ergativity: Emerging Issues}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Editor = {Johns, Alana and Massam, Diane and Ndayiragije, Juv{\'e}nal}, Pages = {3--25}, Publisher = {Springer}, Title = {The locus of {E}rgative Case Assignment: Evidence from Scope}, Year = {2006}} @incollection{Dryer:1996, Author = {Dryer, Matthew S.}, Booktitle = {Handbook on Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Editor = {Jacobs, J.}, Pages = {1050--1065}, Publisher = {Walter de Gruyter}, Title = {Word Order Typology}, Volume = {2}, Year = {1996}} @article{Dryer:1991, Author = {Dryer, Matthew S.}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Journal of Linguistics}, Pages = {443--482}, Title = {{SVO} Languages and the {OV/VO} Typology}, Volume = {27}, Year = {1991}} @incollection{Dryer:2007, Author = {Dryer, Matthew S.}, Booktitle = {Clause Structure: Language Typology and Syntactic Description}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Editor = {Shopen, Timothy}, Publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, Title = {Word Order}, Volume = {1}, Year = {2007}} @incollection{Dryer:2005a, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Dryer, Matthew S.}, Booktitle = {The World Atlas of Language Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Editor = {Haspelmath, Martin and Dryer, Matthew S. and Comrie, Bernard}, Pages = {334-335}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Order of Subject and Verb}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Dryer:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Dryer, Matthew S.}, Booktitle = {The World Atlas of Language Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Editor = {Haspelmath, Martin and Dryer, Matthew S. and Comrie, Bernard}, Pages = {378--379}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Position of Interrogative Phrases in Content Questions}, Year = {2005}} @unpublished{Giannakidou:2002a, Author = {Giannakidou, Anastasia and Merchant, Jason}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Month = {May}, Note = {paper presented at the Maryland Mayfest}, Title = {Modularity in the {M}inimalist {P}rogram}, Year = {2002}} @incollection{Freidin:1986, Address = {Dordrecht}, Author = {Freidin, Robert}, Booktitle = {Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Editor = {Lust, Barbara}, Pages = {151--188}, Publisher = {Reidel}, Title = {Fundamental Issues in the Theory of Binding}, Volume = {1}, Year = {1986}} @unpublished{Fitzpatrick:2005, Author = {Fitzpatrick, Justin and Groat, Erich}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Month = {March}, Note = {paper presented at ECO5}, Title = {The Timing of Syntactic Operations: Phases, C-command, Remerger, and {L}ebeaux Effects}, Year = {2005}} @unpublished{Frampton:2004, Author = {Frampton, John}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2009-04-17 07:52:05 -0500}, Note = {unpublished manuscript, Northeastern University}, Title = {Copies, Traces, Occurrences, and all that: Evidence from {B}ulgarian multiple \emph{wh}-phenomena}, Year = {2004}} @book{Geach:1962, Address = {Ithaca, NY}, Author = {Geach, Peter}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Publisher = {Cornell University Press}, Title = {Reference and Generality}, Year = {1962}} @article{Kratzer:1990a, Author = {Kratzer, Angelika}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistics and Philosophy}, Pages = {273--324}, Title = {Uniqueness}, Volume = {13}, Year = {1990}} @incollection{Kratzer:2007, Author = {Kratzer, Angelika}, Booktitle = {The {S}tanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Title = {Situations in Natural Language Semantics}, Year = {to appear}} @book{Rothstein:2004, Author = {Rothstein, Susan}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Publisher = {Blackwell Publishing}, Title = {Structuring Events}, Year = {2004}} @article{Higginbotham:1983a, Author = {Higginbotham, James}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {The Journal of Philosophy}, Number = {2}, Pages = {100--127}, Title = {The Logic of Perceptual Reports: An Extensional Alternative to Situation Semantics}, Volume = {80}, Year = {1983}} @article{Hornstein:2007, Author = {Hornstein, Norbert}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2hornstein.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {410--411}, Title = {A Very Short Note on Existential Constructions}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Hansson:2007, Author = {Hansson, Gunnar {\'O}lafur}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:51 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2hansson.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {395--409}, Title = {Blocking Effects in Agreement by Correspondence}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Han:2007a, Author = {Han, Chung-Hye and Lee, Chungmin}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2han.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {373--394}, Title = {On Negative Imperatives in {K}orean}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Haddad:2007, Author = {Haddad, Youssef A.}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2haddad.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {363--372}, Title = {Subject Anaphors: Exempt or Non Exempt?}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Almeida:2007, Author = {Almeida, Diogo A. de A. and Yoshida, Masaya}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2almeida.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {349--362}, Title = {A Problem for the Preposition Stranding Generalization}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Adger:2007a, Author = {Adger, David}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2adger.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {343--349}, Title = {Pronouns Postpose at {PF}}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Giorgi:2007, Author = {Giorgi, Alessandra}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2giorgi.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {321--342}, Title = {On the Nature of Long-Distance Anaphors}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Dikken:2007, Abstract = {Ouhalla's (2004) valuable discussion of relativized and possessed noun phrases in Amharic leaves a number of questions open. Foremost among these is the placement of the linker element ya. Starting from an analysis of relative clauses and possessors as predicates of their ``heads,'' this article develops a syntax of complex noun phrases in Amharic that explains the raison d'etre and placement of ya, and also accommodates facts about definiteness marking and agreement in the Amharic complex noun phrase that have hitherto largely escaped attention or analysis. The analysis emphasizes the role of Predicate Inversion and head movement in syntax, and it confirms and extends the minimalist Agree-and phase-based approach to syntactic relationships.}, Author = {Dikken, Marcel den}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2dikken.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {302--320}, Title = {Amharic Relatives and Possessives: Definiteness, Agreement, and the Linker}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Bhatt:2007, Abstract = {Mahajan (1997) and Simpson and Bhattacharya (2003) analyze Indo- Aryan languages such as Hindi-Urdu and Bangla as SVO. We argue against this position, drawing on rightward scrambling in Hindi-Urdu to make this point. We propose an account of the phenomenon in terms of rightward remnant-VP movement. This account differs from proposals that posit rightward movement of individual arguments as well as from the antisymmetric proposals mentioned above, which treat rightward scrambling as argument stranding. Our rightward remnant movement analysis better captures two empirical properties of rightward scrambling that remain elusive in the other accounts: the correlation between linear order and scope, and restricted scope for rightwardscrambled wh-expressions.}, Author = {Bhatt, Rajesh and Dayal, Veneeta}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2bhatt.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {287-301}, Title = {Rightward Scrambling as Rightward Remnant Movement}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Hyde:2007, Abstract = {Three aspects of Banawa prosody (Buller, Buller, and Everett 1993, Everett 1996a,b) have been argued to present significant difficulties for metrical stress theory. First, Banawa stress is sensitive to the presence or absence ofsyllable onsets; second, Banawa tolerates monomoraic feet yet requires a bimoraic minimal word; and, third, it seems to employ mora-based footing that is free to ignore syllable boundaries. In this article, I argue that these issues are not nearly as problematic as they might first appear. The article demonstrates that Banawa's onset sensitivity can be produced by a constraint aligning the head syllables off eet with onsets, that its minimal word restriction can be produced with Nonfinality constraints, and that it can maintain syllable integrity simply by giving clash and lapse avoidance priority over other footing considerations.}, Author = {Hyde, Brett}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2hyde.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {239--285}, Title = {Issues in Banaw{\'a} Prosody: Onset Sensitivity, Minimal Words, and Syllable Integrity}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @article{Folli:2007, Abstract = {As shown by Kayne (1975), Romance causatives with faire fall into two classes, faire infinitif (FI) and faire par (FP). We argue from Italian data that the properties of the two classes depend on the nature of the complement of fare: FI embeds a vP, FP a nominalized VP. The syntactic and semantic characteristics of these complements account straightforwardly for well-known differences between FI and FP, including the previously untreated ``obligation'' requirement in FI, absent in FP. Our analysis also accounts for another subtle restriction on the formation of FP: the existence of an animacy requirement on the subject of fare, absent in FI. Finally, we argue that only FP can undergo passivization; this accounts for a previously unobserved asymmetry in passivizability of causatives of unergative and unaccusative intransitive verbs.}, Author = {Folli, Raffaella and Harley, Heidi}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/38.2folli.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {197--218}, Title = {Causation, Obligation, and Argument Structure: On the Nature of Little v}, Volume = {38}, Year = {2007}} @phdthesis{Vicente:2007, Address = {Leiden, The Netherlands}, Author = {Vicente, Luis}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, School = {Universiteit Leiden}, Title = {The Syntax of Heads and Phrases: A Study of Verb (Phrase) Fronting}, Year = {2007}} @phdthesis{Starke:2001, Author = {Starke, Michal}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, School = {University of Geneva}, Title = {Move Dissolves into Merge: A Theory of Locality}, Year = {2001}} @article{Swart:2007, Abstract = {This paper concentrates on the syntax and semantics of bare nominals in Germanic and Romance languages. These languages do not normally allow nominals to occur without an article. However, some syntactic configurations, including predicative constructions, supplementives and some prepositional phrases, allow bareness of certain nominals. We argue that bare nominals in these constructions refer to capacities: professions, religions, nationalities or other roles in society. Capacities are analyzed as entities of type e, sortally distinct from regular individuals as well as kinds. We further argue that the capacity interpretation is associated withNP---alayer within theDP that lacks number features. This accounts for the number-neutral status of bare nominals. We also show some patterns in languages other than Romance and Germanic that provide further cross-linguistic support for the postulation of capacities as a separate ontological category, specific to a low position within the DP.}, Author = {Swart, Henri{\"e}tte de and Winter, Yoad and Zwarts, Joost}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.1deSwart_etal.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {195--222}, Title = {Bare nominals and reference to capacities}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Myers:2007, Abstract = {In a broad variety of languages with contrastive vowel length, long vowels are systematically excluded from a domain-final position, and are replaced with short vowels there. This is despite the fact that vowels at the end of a domain (utterance, phrase, word) are generally longer in duration than corresponding nonfinal vowels. We propose that the phonological pattern of final shortening arises diachronically from the effects of final devoicing -- the breakdown in voicing at the end of an utterance. Partial devoicing of the final vowel makes it difficult to hear the end of the vowel and so favors identification of final vowels as short. If language learners generalize such an identification pattern, they have adopted a final shortening pattern. The claim that partially voiceless final vowels tend to be identified as short is supported by a series of experiments with Finnish speakers. The first two experiments establish that there is both final lengthening and final devoicing in the language. Three further experiments show that Finnish speakers identify the length category of partially voiceless final vowels on the basis of the duration of its voiced portion, so that partial devoicing of a vowel increases the probability of its being identified as short.}, Author = {Myers, Scott and Hansen, Benjamin B.}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.1Myers_Hansen.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {157--193}, Title = {The Origin of Vowel Length Neutralization in Final Position: Evidence from {F}innish Speakers}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Liptak:2007, Abstract = {In this paper we describe and analyse a particular scope marking construction that has not received attention in the generative literature so far: scope marking into relative and noun-associate clauses, which we will refer to as adjunct scope marking. In this type of scope marking system, a wh-element in an embedded adjunct clause takes matrix scope when it occurs in a clause that syntactically and semantically modifies a wh-phrase in the matrix. These facts provide unambiguous evidence for the indirect dependency approach to wh-scope marking advocated by Dayal (1994, 2000) where the embedded question provides a semantic restriction for thematrix whelement. Dayal's theory will be extended to provide a compositional analysis of these constructions. The extended approach argues for a generalization of the question-formation procedure to different clause types, as first advocated in Sternefeld (2001).}, Author = {Lipt{\'a}k, Anik{\'o} and Zimmerman, Malte}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.1Liptak_Zimmerman.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {103--155}, Title = {Indirect scope marking again: a case for generalized question formation}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Heath:2007, Abstract = {Bidirectional case markers in West African languages, including those of the Songhay family, are morphemes inserted between subject and object NPs that would otherwise be adjacent. They therefore specify both that the NP to the left is a subject, and that the NP to the right is an object, and they cannot be bracketed uniquely with either. This is shown by the fact that these morphemes are absent when either subject or object position is (structurally and phonologically) absent, for example due to extraction. This is the only morphological case-marking in the relevant languages. The operation inserting such morphemes must have reference to constituent structure (NP), abstract case (subject, object), and linear adjacency. These data increase the evidence that complex case-marking operations can apply in a centrally located morphology component that has simultaneous access to categorial and linear relations. The idea is questionable that such morphological operations take place at a syntax/PF interface, where syntactic categories are first aligned with prosodic phrases, since actual prosodic (e.g. accentual) bracketings do not always coincide with the bracketings relevant to case morphology. This point is made with data from Tamashek (Berber) nominal prefix alternations, preceding the main section on Songhay case marking.}, Author = {Heath, Jeffrey}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.1Heath.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {83--101}, Title = {Bidirectional case-marking and linear adjacency}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Giannakidou:2007, Abstract = {This paper explores the role that the scalar properties and presuppositions of even play in creating polarity sensitive even meanings crosslinguistically (henceforth EVEN). I discuss the behavior of three lexically distinct Greek counterparts of even in positive, negative, subjunctive sentences, and polar questions. These items are shown to be polarity sensitive, and a three-way distinction is posited between a positive polarity (akomi ke), a negative polarity (oute), and a `flexible scale'even (esto) which does not introduce likelihood, but is associated with scales made salient by the context. The analysis is a refinement of Rooth's original idea that negative polarity is involved in the interpretation of English even, and establishes further that the ``negative'' polarity domain of EVEN includes a sensitivity that is not strictly speaking negative (flexible scale esto). The distributional restrictions of EVEN items are shown to follow from distinct presuppositions (positive polarity and flexible scale EVEN), or from their lexical featural specification (negative polarity EVEN), a result that squares neatly with the fact that ill-formedness is systematic pragmatic deviance in the former case but robust ungrammaticality in the latter. This result supports the by now widely accepted view that polarity dependencies are not of uniform nature, and that we need to distinguish presupposition failures (which are weaker and possibly fixable in some contexts) from cases of ungrammaticality which are robust and cannot be fixed in any context (Giannakidou, 2001).}, Author = {Giannakidou, Anastasia}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.1Giannakidou.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {39--81}, Title = {The landscape of {EVEN}}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Embick:2007, Abstract = {A number of interactions in grammar are referred to as showing blocking effects, typically defined as cases in which the existence of one form prevents the existence of a form that is otherwise expected to occur. Patterns of analytic/synthetic alternation, in which two-word and one-word forms alternate with each other, have been taken to be instances of blocking in this sense. An example is found in the formation of English comparatives and superlatives, where, for example, the synthetic form smarter appears to block the analytic form *more smart. Analytic forms are available in other cases (e.g. more intelligent), such that the interaction between the ``one word'' and ``two word'' forms is crucially at issue. This paper examines English comparative and superlative formation, concentrating on the question of how the morphophonology relates to syntax and semantics. A central point is that in the architecture of Distributed Morphology, these cases do not involve word/word or word/phrase competition- based blocking. Rather, blocking effects broadly construed are reduced to the effects of distinct mechanisms: (1) Vocabulary Insertion at a particular terminal node (morpheme), and (2) the operation of combinatory processes. The paper provides a detailed discussion of the latter type, showing that synthetic comparative/superlative forms are created post-syntactically by affixation under adjacency. Throughout the discussion, questions concerning the status of blocking effects in Distributed Morphology, and those found in analytic/synthetic alternations in particular, play a central role.}, Author = {Embick, David}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2010-01-14 13:31:40 +0100}, Journal = {Natural Language and Linguistic Theory}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*NLLT/25.1Embick.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1--37}, Title = {Blocking Effects and analytic/synthetic alternations}, Volume = {25}, Year = {2007}} @article{Stepanov:2007, Abstract = {The traditional unified approaches to extractability out of subjects and adjuncts in the form of Huang's (1982) Condition on Extraction Domains (CED) and Chomsky's (1986a) Barriers and its minimalist descendants face an empirical challenge presented by languages in which extraction out of subjects is possible but extraction out of adjuncts is not. The existence of such languages calls into question the unifying basis for the traditional accounts---namely, the complement/noncomplement distinction that was at the core of these accounts. In this paper I consider a possible extension of a recent minimalist account making use of the complement/noncomplement distinction--- Nunes and Uriagereka (2000)---to the problematic languages and show that it also encounters conceptual and empirical problems. I then propose an eclectic minimalist approach to extraction domains in which extractability out of subjects and adjuncts are regulated by different mechanisms of grammar in a nonoverlapping manner.}, Author = {Stepanov, Arthur}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Syntax/syntax10(1)Stepanov.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {80--126}, Title = {The End of {CED}? Minimalism and Extraction Domains}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{An:2007, Abstract = {In this paper, I discuss the distribution of null complementizer clauses in English. I argue that two factors are interwoven to yield the observed distribution: first, unlike what is standardly assumed, not only the emptiness of C but also that of Spec,CP matters; second, the relevant clauses are obligatorily parsed as separate intonational phrases. I show that these properties lead to a new generalization that can be derived from independent assumptions about the syntax-phonology interface, according to which an intonational phrase whose boundary cannot be properly demarcated is disallowed in PF. I argue that this is exactly why null complementizer clauses are ruled out in certain syntactic positions. I also discuss a parallelism between intonational phrases and the notion of phase proposed by Chomsky (2000, 2001).}, Author = {An, Duk-Ho}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Syntax/Syntax10(1)An.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {38--79}, Title = {Clauses in Noncanonical Positions at the Syntax-Phonology Interface}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @article{Adger:2007, Abstract = {The Person Case Constraint is frequently concomitant with Case Syncretism. We provide a syntax-driven account of both phenomena that relies on the dual role that /-features play in selecting and in Case-licensing argument DPs. The account differs from other syntactic approaches to the PCC in the role it affords the applicative head in the Case system and in the attention it pays to the syntactic structures that feed morphology and therefore induce syncretism.}, Author = {Adger, David and Harbour, Daniel}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Syntax}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Syntax/syntax10(1)Adger_Harbour.pdf}, Number = {1}, Pages = {2--37}, Title = {Syntax and Syncretisms of the Person Case Constraint}, Volume = {10}, Year = {2007}} @incollection{Starke:2004, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Starke, Michal}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {251--268}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {On the Inexistence of Specifiers and the Nature of Heads}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Rizzi:2004a, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Rizzi, Luigi}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {223--251}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Locality and Left Periphery}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Mehler:2004, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Mehler, Jacques and Nespor, Marina}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {213--222}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Linguistic Rhythm and the Acquisition of Language}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Kayne:2004, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Kayne, Richard S.}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {192--212}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Prepositions as Probes}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Cinque:2004, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Cinque, Guglielmo}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {132--191}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {``Restructuring'' and Functional Structure}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Chomsky:2004, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Chomsky, Noam}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {104--131}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Beyond Explanatory Adequacy}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Chierchia:2004a, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Chierchia, Gennaro}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {39--103}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Scalar Implicatures, Polarity Phenomena, and the Syntax/Pragmatics Interface}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @incollection{Caramazza:2004, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Caramazza, Alfonso and Shapiro, Kevin}, Booktitle = {Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Belletti, Adriana}, Pages = {15--38}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Language Categories in the Brain: Evidence from Aphasia}, Volume = {3}, Year = {2004}} @article{McCloskey:1986, Author = {McCloskey, James}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Pages = {183--186}, Title = {Right Node Raising and Preposition Stranding}, Volume = {17}, Year = {1986}} @article{Bresnan:1971a, Author = {Bresnan, Joan}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Language}, Pages = {257--281}, Title = {On Sentence Stress and Syntactic Transformations}, Volume = {47}, Year = {1971}} @article{Tanaka:1999a, Author = {Tanaka, Hidekazu}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Journal = {Linguistic Inquiry}, Local-Url = {file://localhost/Users/kyle/Documents/Bookends/Attachments/*Linguistic%20Inquiry/30.2Tanaka.pdf}, Number = {2}, Pages = {317--325}, Title = {Raised Objects and {S}uperiority}, Volume = {30}, Year = {1999}} @incollection{Zwart:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Zwart, Jan-Wouter}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {903--946}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Continental {W}est-{G}ermanic Languages}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Whitman:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Whitman, John}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {880--902}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Preverbal Elements in {K}orean and {J}apanese}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Tallerman:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Tallerman, Maggie}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {839--879}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The {C}eltic Languages}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Simpson:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Simpson, Andrew}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {806--838}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Classifiers and {DP} Structure in Southeast {A}sia}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Rigau:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Rigau, Gemma}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {775--805}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Number Agreement Variation in {C}atalan Dialects}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Rice:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Rice, Keren and Saxon, Leslie}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {698--774}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Comparative {A}thapaskan Syntax: Arguments and Projections}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Ouhalla:2005a, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Ouhalla, Jamal}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {607--638}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Clitic Placement, Grammaticalization, and Reanalysis in {B}erber}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Raposo:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Raposo, Eduardo P. and Uriagereka, Juan}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {639--697}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Clitic Placement in {W}estern {I}berian: A Minimalist View}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Munaro:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Munaro, Nicola and Pollock, Jean-Yves}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {542--606}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Qu'st-ce-que (qu)-est ce que? {A} Case Study in Comparative {R}omance Interrogative Syntax}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Kornfilt:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Kornfilt, Jaklin}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {513--541}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Agreement and Its Placement in {T}urkic Nonsubject Relative Clauses}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Kihm:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Kihm, Alain}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {459--512}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {Noun Class, {G}ender, and the Lexicon-Syntax-Morphology Interfaces: {A} Comparative Study of {N}-iger-{C}ongo and {R}omance Languages}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Holmberg:2005a, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Holmberg, Anders and Platzack, Christer}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {420--458}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The {S}candinavian Languages}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{Franks:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {Franks, Steven}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Date-Modified = {2007-08-29 09:36:52 -0400}, Editor = {Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S.}, Pages = {373--419}, Publisher = {Oxford University Press}, Title = {The {S}lavic Languages}, Year = {2005}} @incollection{DeGraff:2005, Address = {Oxford}, Author = {DeGraff, Michel}, Booktitle = {The {O}xford Handbook of Comparative Syntax}, Date-Added = {2007-08-29 09: