Abraham, Werner and Sjaak de Meij (eds.) 1986, Topic, Focus, and Configurationality, Amsterdam: John Benjamins

Ackerman, Farrel 1984, ‘Verbal modifiers as argument taking predicates: complex verbs as predicate complexes in Hungarian’, Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 25: 23–71Google Scholar

Ackerman, Farrel 1987, ‘Pronominal incorporation: the case of prefixal adverbs’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1987, pp. 213–260

Ackerman, Farrel and Webelhuth, Gert 1997, ‘The composition of (dis)continuous predicates: lexical or syntactic?’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 44, 317–340Google Scholar

Alberti, Gábor 1995, ‘Role assignment in Hungarian possessive constructions’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 11–28

Alberti, Gábor 1997a, Argument Selection, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang

Alberti, Gábor 1997b, ‘Restrictions on the degree of referentiality of arguments in Hungarian sentences’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 44: 341–362Google Scholar

Alberti, Gábor 1998, ‘On passivization in Hungarian’, in de Groot and Kenesei (eds.) 1998, pp. 103–122

Alberti, Gábor 1999, ‘Climbing for aspect’, paper presented at the Workshop on verb clusters Dutch–Hungarian Study Center, Öttevény, Oct. 1999

Alberti, Gábor and István Kenesei (eds.) 2000, Approaches to Hungarian 7, Szeged: JATE

Alberti, Gábor and Anna Medve 2000, ‘Focus constructions and the “scope-inversion puzzle” in Hungarian’, in Alberti and Kenesei (eds.) 2000, pp. 93–118

Alexiadou, Artemis and Anagnostopoulou, Elena 1998, ‘Parametrizing AGR: word order, V-movement and EPP-checking’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16: 491–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark 1985, ‘The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation’, Linguistic Inquiry 16: 373–415Google Scholar

Bánréti, Zoltán 1994, ‘Coordination’, in Kiefer and É. Kiss (eds.) 1994, pp. 355–414

Bartos, Huba 1997, ‘On “subjective” and “objective” agreement in Hungarian’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 44: 363–384Google Scholar

Bartos, Huba 1999a, Morfoszintaxis és interpretáció: a magyar inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere, Ph.D. dissertation, Budapest: ELTE

Bartos, Huba 1999b. ‘Verbal complexes and morpho-syntactic merger’, paper presented at the Workshop on verb clusters Dutch–Hungarian Study Center, Öttevény, Oct. 1999

Bartos, Huba 2000a, ‘Az alanyi és a tárgyas ragozásról’, in Büky and Maleczki (eds.) 2000, pp. 153–170

Bartos, Huba 2000b, ‘Topics, quantifiers, subjects: the preverbal field in Chinese and Hungarian’, paper presented at the International Symposium on Topic and Focus in Chinese, June 21–22, 2000, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, to appear in Sze-Wing Tang and Dingxu Shi (eds.), Topic and Focus in Chinese

Bartos, Huba 2000c, ‘Affix order in Hungarian and the Mirror Principle’, in Alberti and Kenesei (eds.) 2000, 53–70

Bartos, Huba 2001, ‘Mutatónévmási módosítók a magyar főnévi szerkezetekben: egyezés vagy osztozás?’, in Marianne Bakró-Nagy, Zoltán Bánréti and Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), Újabb eredmények a strukturális magyar nyelvtan és a nyelvtörténet köréből, Budapest: Osiris

Beghelli, Filippo and Tim Stowell 1997, ‘Distributivity and negation: the syntax of each and every’, in Szabolcsi (ed.) 1997b, pp. 71–108

Bittner, Maria and Hale, Ken 1996, ‘The structural determination of case and agreement’, Linguistic Inquiry 27: 1–68Google Scholar

Borer, Hagit 1989, ‘Anaphoric Agr’, in Osvaldo Jaeggli and Ken J. Safir (eds.), The null subject parameter, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 69–109

Brassai, Sámuel 1860, 1863–65, ‘A magyar mondat’, Magyar Akadémiai Értesítő. A Nyelv- és Széptudományi Osztály Közlönye 1: 279–399; 3: 3–128, 173–409Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan 1982, ‘Control and complementation’, Linguistic Inquiry 13: 343–434Google Scholar

Bródy, Michael 1990a, ‘Remarks on the order of elements in the Hungarian focus field’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1990, pp. 95–122

Bródy, Michael 1990b, ‘Some remarks on the focus field in Hungarian’, University College London Working Papers in Linguistics 2, 201–225Google Scholar

Bródy, Michael 1995, ‘Focus and checking theory’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 29–44

Bródy, Michael 1999, ‘Word order, restructuring and mirror theory’, ms., University College London / Linguistic Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences

Bródy, Michael 2000, ‘Mirror theory: Syntactic representation in perfect syntax’, Linguistic Inquiry 31: 29–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bródy, Michael and Anna Szabolcsi 2000, ‘Overt scope: a case study in Hungarian’, ms., University College London / New York University

Büky, László and Márta Maleczki (eds.) 1995, A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei II, Szeged: JATE

Büky, László and Márta Maleczki (eds.) 1998, A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei III, Szeged: JATE

Büky, László and Márta Maleczki (eds.) 2000, A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei IV, Szeged: JATE

Cardinaletti, Anna and Michal Starke 1999, ‘The typology of structural deficiency: a case study of three classes of pronouns’, in Henk van Riemsdijk (ed.), Clitics in the Languages of Europe, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 145–233

Chomsky, Noam 1976, ‘Conditions on rules of grammar’, Linguistic Analysis 2: 303–349Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding, Dordrecht: Reidel

Chomsky, Noam 1986, Knowledge of Language, New York: Praeger

Chomsky, Noam 1995, The Minimalist Program, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Chomsky, Noam and Morris Halle 1968, The Sound Pattern of English, New York: Harper and Row

Cinque, Guglielmo 1997, Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Crosslinguistic Perspective, New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press

Comorovski, Ileana 1996, Interrogative Phrases and the Syntax–Semantics Interface, Dordrecht: Kluwer

Csirmaz, Anikó and Balázs Surányi 1998, ‘Are there expletives in Hungarian?’, paper presented at the First Conference on Linguistic Theory in Eastern European Languages, April 19–21, Szeged University

Dalmi, Gréte 1995, Hungarian Infinitival Constructions, Master of philosophy Thesis, University of Sydney

Diesing, M. 1992, ‘Bare plural subjects and the derivation of logical representations’, Linguistic Inquiry 23: 353–380Google Scholar

Dikken, Marcel den 1995, Particles: On the Syntax of Verb–Particle, Triadic, and Causative Constructions, New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press

Dikken, Marcel den 1999a, ‘On the structural representation of possession and agreement: the case of (anti-)agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1999, pp. 137–178

Dikken, Marcel den 1999b, ‘Agreement and clause union’, ms., City University of New York

Dikken, Marcel den 2000, ‘A tárgyi személyes névmások szerkezete és az egyeztetés’, in Büky and Maleczki (eds.) 2000, pp. 171–180

Dikken, Marcel den and Anastasia Giannakidou 2000, ‘What the hell?’, to appear in NELS 31

Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila 1998, ‘Fragments of Balkan Nominal Structure’, in Artemis Alexiadou and Chris Wilder (eds.), Possessors, Predicates and Movement in the Determiner Phrase, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 333–360

Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen 1993, Romanian Syntax, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

Kiss, É. Katalin 1977, ‘Topic and focus in Hungarian syntax’, Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics 8, 1–42Google Scholar

Kiss, É. Katalin 1981, ‘Syntactic relations in Hungarian, a ‘free’ word order language’, Linguistic Inquiry 12: 185–215Google Scholar

Kiss, É. Katalin 1985–1986, ‘Parasitic chains’, The Linguistic Review 5: 41–74Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin 1987a, Configurationality in Hungarian, Dordrecht: Reidel

É. Kiss, Katalin 1987b, ‘Is the VP universal?’ in Kenesei (ed.) 1987, pp. 13–87

Kiss, É. Katalin 1988, ‘Még egyszer a magyar mondat intonációjáról és hangsúlyozásáról’, Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 89: 1–52Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin 1990, ‘Why noun–complement clauses are barriers’, in Joan Mascaro and Marina Nespor (eds.), A Festschrift for Henk van Riemsdijk, Dordrecht: Foris, pp. 265–277

É. Kiss, Katalin 1991a, ‘Logical structure in syntactic structure: the case of Hungarian’, in James Huang and Robert May (eds.), Logical Structure and Syntactic Structure, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 111–148

É. Kiss, Katalin 1991b, ‘On the locality condition of anaphora and pronominal variable binding’, in Jan Koster and Eric Reuland (eds.), Long Distance Anaphora, Cambridge University Press, pp. 245–261

É. Kiss, Katalin 1991c, ‘An argument for movement’, in K. Netter and H. Haider (eds.), Representation versus Derivation, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 199–217

É. Kiss, Katalin 1992, ‘Az egyszerű mondat szerkezete’, in Kiefer (ed.) 1992b, pp. 79–178

Kiss, É. Katalin 1993, ‘Wh-movement and specificity’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11: 85–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin 1994a, ‘Sentence structure and word order’, in Kiefer and É. Kiss (eds.) 1994, pp. 1–90

É. Kiss, Katalin 1994b, ‘Scrambling as the base generation of random complement order’, in Norbert Corver and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Studies on Scrambling. Movement and Non-movement Approaches to Free-word-order Phenomena, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 221–256

Kiss, É. Katalin 1995a, ‘Multiple topic, one focus?’, GLOW Newsletter 34: 73Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin 1995b, ‘Többszörös fókusz a magyar mondatszerkezetben’, in Büky and Maleczki (eds.) 1995, pp. 47–66

É. Kiss, Katalin 1995c, ‘The definiteness effect revisited’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 63–88

Kiss, É. Katalin 1996, ‘Two subject positions in English’, The Linguistic Review 13: 119–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiss, É. Katalin 1998a, ‘Multiple topic, one focus?’ Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45: 3–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiss, É. Katalin 1998b, ‘Identificational focus versus information focus’, Language 74: 245–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin 1998c, ‘Discourse-configurationality in the languages of Europe’, in Anna Siewierska (ed.), Constituent Order in the Languages of Europe, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 681–729

É. Kiss, Katalin 1998d, ‘Mondattan’, in K. É. Kiss, Ferenc Kiefer, and Péter Siptár, Új magyar nyelvtan, Budapest: Osiris, pp. 15–185

É. Kiss, Katalin 1999a, ‘Verbal prefixes or postpositions? Postpositional aspectualizers in Hungarian’, in de Groot and Kenesei (eds.), pp. 123–148

É. Kiss, Katalin 1999b, ‘Strategies of complex predicate formation and the Hungarian Verbal Complex’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1999, pp. 115–136

É. Kiss, Katalin 2000a, ‘The Hungarian noun phrase is like the English noun phrase’, in Alberti and Kenesei (eds.) 2000, pp. 119–150

É. Kiss, Katalin 2000b, ‘A [+referáló] és [+specifikus] jegyek ellenőrzése a kontrasztív topik esetében’, in Büky and Maleczki (eds.) 2000, pp. 85–97

É. Kiss, Katalin 2001, ‘Parasitic chains revisited’, in Peter W. Culicover and Paul M. Postal (eds.), Parasitic Gaps, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 99–123

É. Kiss, Katalin to appear, ‘The EPP in a topic-prominent language’, in Peter Svenonius (ed.), Subjects, Topics, and the EPP, Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press

É. Kiss, Katalin and Ferenc Kiefer (eds.) 1994, The Syntactic Structure of Hungarian: Syntax and Semantics 27, San Diego / New York: Academic Press

É. Kiss, Katalin, Ferenc Kiefer, and Péter Siptár 1998, Új Magyar Nyelvtan, Budapest: Osiris

Emonds, Joseph 1978, A Transformational Approach to English Syntax, New York: Academic Press

Enç, Mürvet 1991, ‘The semantics of specificity’, Linguistic Inquiry 22: 21–25Google Scholar

Farkas, Donka 1986, ‘The syntactic position of focus in Hungarian’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4: 77–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Farkas, Donka 1987, ‘Direct object pro in Hungarian’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1987, pp. 191–211

Farkas, Donka 1990, ‘Two cases of underspecification in morphology’, Linguistic Inquiry 21: 539–550Google Scholar

Giannakidou, Anastasia 2000, ‘Negative … concord?’ Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 457–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giannakidou, Anastasia and J. Quer 1995, ‘Two mechanisms for the licensing of indefinites’, in L. Gabriele et al. (eds.), Papers from the 6th Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Midamerica, Bloomington, IN: IULC Publications

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966, ‘Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements’, in Joseph Greenberg (ed.), Universals of Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 73–113

Grimshaw, Jane 1990, Argument Structure, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Grimshaw, Jane 1991, ‘Extended projection’, ms., Brandeis University

Groot, Casper de 1981, ‘Sentence intertwining in Hungarian’, in M. A. Bolkenstein et al. (eds.), Predication and Expression in Functional Grammar, New York: Academic Press, 41–64

Groot, Casper de and István Kenesei (eds.) 1998, Approaches to Hungarian 5, Szeged: JATE

Gyuris, Beáta 1999, ‘The interpretation of adverbial quantifiers in contrastive topic in Hungarian’, in Matako Hirotani and Andries Coetze (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 30, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, pp. 259–274

Gyuris, Beáta 2000, ‘Contrastive topics crosslinguistically’, paper presented at the 2nd International Conference in Contrastive Semantics and Pragmatics, Sept. 11–13, Cambridge

Haader, Lea 1998, ‘A mondatátszövődés a nyelvhasználat szemszögéből’, Magyar Nyelvőr 122: 318–324Google Scholar

Haegeman, Liliane 1995, The Syntax of Negation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Haegeman, Liliane and Zanuttini, R. 1991, ‘Negative heads and the Neg Criterion’, The Linguistic Review 8: 233–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hallman, Peter 1998, ‘Reiterative syntax’, in J. Black and V. Motapayane (eds.), Clitics, Pronouns, and Movements. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 87–131

Herburger, Elena 1997, ‘Focus and weak noun phrases’, Natural Language Semantics 5: 53–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horvath, Julia 1986a, Focus in the Theory of Grammar and the Syntax of Hungarian, Dordrecht: Foris

Horvath, Julia 1986b, ‘Remarks on the configurationality issue’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 65–87

Horvath, Julia 1987, ‘On models with a VP-less phrase structure’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1987, pp. 133–165

Horvath, Julia 1990, ‘Parasitic gap constructions: an adjunct/argument asymmetry’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1990, pp. 65–94

Horvath, Julia 1992, ‘Anti-c-command and case-compatibility in the licensing of parasitic chains’, The Linguistic Review 9, 183–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horvath, Julia 1995, ‘Partial wh-movement and wh-scope-markers’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 89–124

Horvath, Julia 1997, ‘The status of “Wh-expletives” and the partial Wh-movement construction in Hungarian’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15: 509–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horvath, Julia 1998, ‘Wh-phrases and the wh-scope-marker strategy in Hungarian interrogatives’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45: 31–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hunyadi, László 1986, ‘The expression of logical scope in Hungarian: on its syntax and semantics’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 89–102

Hunyadi, László 1997, Hungarian Sentence Prosody and Universal Grammar: Studies in Applied Linguistics 3, Debrecen: Kossuth Lajos University

Hunyadi, László 1999, ‘The outlines of a metrical syntax of Hungarian’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 46, 69–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacobs, Joachim 1986, ‘The syntax of focus and adverbials in German’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 103–127

Jakab, Edit 1998, talk presented at the Fourth International Conference on the Structure of Hungarian, Pécs: Janus Pannonius University

Kálmán, C. György et al. 1989, A magyar segédigék rendszere. Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok 17: 49–103

Kálmán, László et al. 1986, ‘Hocus, focus, and verb types in Hungarian infinitive constructions’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 129–142

Kálmán, László 1990, ‘Deferred information: the semantics of commitment’, in László Kálmán and László Pólos (eds.), Papers from the Second Symposium on Logic and Language, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 125–157

Kálmán, László 1995, ‘Definiteness effect verbs in Hungarian’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 221–242

Kayne, Richard 1994, The Antisymmetry of Syntax, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Kenesei, István (ed.) 1985, Approaches to Hungarian 1, Szeged: JATE

Kenesei, István 1986, ‘On the logic of Hungarian word order’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 143–159

Kenesei, István (ed.) 1987, Approaches to Hungarian 2, Szeged: JATE

Kenesei, István 1989, ‘On the interaction of lexical structure and logical form in pronominal binding’, in László Marácz and Pietr Muysken (eds.), Configurationality: The Typology of Asymmetries, Dordrecht: Reidel

Kenesei, István (ed.) 1990, Approaches to Hungarian 3, Szeged: JATE

Kenesei, István 1992, ‘Az alárendelt mondatok szerkezete’, in Kiefer (ed.) 1992b, pp. 529–714

Kenesei, István 1994, ‘Subordinate clauses’, in Kiefer and É. Kiss (eds.) 1994, pp. 275–354

Kenesei, István (ed.) 1995, Approaches to Hungarian 5, Szeged: JATE

Kenesei, István 1998, ‘Adjuncts and arguments in VP-focus in Hungarian’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45: 61–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kenesei, István (ed.) 1999, Crossing Boundaries, Amsterdam: John Benjamins

Kenesei, István 2000, ‘Van-e segédige a magyarban?’, in Kenesei (ed.), Igei vonzatstruktúrák a magyarban, Budapest: Osiris, pp. 157–196

Kenesei, István and Csaba Pléh (eds.) 1992, Approaches to Hungarian 4, Szeged: JATE

Khalaily, Shamir 1995, ‘QR and the minimalist theory of syntax: the case of universally and negative quantified expressions in Palestinian Arabic’, ms., University of Leiden

Kiefer, Ferenc 1967, On Emphasis and Word Order in Hungarian, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press

Kiefer, Ferenc 1992a, ‘Az aspektus és a mondat szerkezete’, in Kiefer (ed.) 1992b, pp. 797–886

Kiefer, Ferenc (ed.) 1992b, Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó

Kiefer, Ferenc 1994a, ‘Aspect and syntactic structure’, in Kiefer and É. Kiss (eds.) 1994, pp. 415–464

Kiefer, Ferenc 1994b, ‘Some peculiarities in the aspectual system of Hungarian’, in C. Bache, H. Basbøll, and C. E. Lindberg (eds.), Tense–Aspect–Aspectuality, Berlin: de Gruyter

Kiefer, Ferenc (ed.) 2000, Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3: Morfológia, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó

Kiefer, Ferenc and Katalin É. Kiss (eds.) 1994, The Syntactic Structure of Hungarian: Syntax and Semantics 27. San Diego / New York: Academic Press

Kinyalolo, Kasangati 1990, Syntactic Dependencies and the Spec–Head Agreement Hypothesis in KiLega, Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA

Komlósy, András 1985, ‘Predicate complementation’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1985, pp. 53–75

Komlósy, András 1992, ‘Régensek és vonzatok’, in Kiefer (ed.) 1992b, pp. 299–529

Komlósy, András 1994, ‘Complements and adjuncts’, in É. Kiss and Kiefer (eds.) 1994, pp. 91–178

Koopman, Hilda and Anna Szabolcsi 2000, Verbal Complexes, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Kratzer, Angelika 1995, ‘Stage-level and individual-level predicates’, in G. N. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier (eds.), The Generic Book, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 125–175

Krifka, Manfred 1992, ‘A framework for focus-sensitive quantification’, in Ch. Barker and David Dowty (eds.), SALT II. Proceedings from the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Working Papers in Linguistics 40, Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, pp. 215–236

Kuno, Susumu 1973, Japanese Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Laczkó, Tibor 1985, ‘Deverbal nominals and their complements in noun phrases’, in Kenesei (ed.), pp. 93–119

Laczkó, Tibor 1990, ‘On arguments and adjuncts of derived nominals: a lexical-functional approach’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1990, pp. 123–147

Laczkó, Tibor 1995a, The Syntax of Hungarian Noun Phrases: MetaLinguistica 2, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang

Laczkó, Tibor 1995b, ‘On the status of való in adjectivalized constituents in noun phrases’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 125–152

Ladusaw, William 1992. ‘Expressing negation’, in Ch. Barker and D. Dowty (eds.), SALT II. Proceedings from the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Working Papers in Linguistics 40, Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, pp. 237–259

Ladusaw, William 1994. ‘Thetic and categorical, stage and individual, weak and strong’, in M. Harvey and L. Santelman (eds.), SALT 4, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 220–229

Lipták, Anikó 1998, ‘A magyar fókuszemelések egy minimalista elemzése’, in Büky and Maleczki (eds.) 1998, pp. 93–116

Lipták, Anikó 2000, ‘On the difference between focus movement and wh-movement’, GLOW Newsletter 44: 78–79Google Scholar

Maleczki, Márta 1992, ‘Bare common nouns and their relation to the temporal constitution of events in Hungarian’, in Paul Dekker and Martin Stokhof (eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth Amsterdam Colloquium, Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation, Amsterdam University, pp. 347–365

Maleczki, Márta 1995, ‘On the definiteness effect in Hungarian’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 263–284

Maleczki, Márta 1999, ‘Weak subjects in fixed space’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 46: 95–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marácz, László 1986a, ‘Dressed or naked: the case of the PP in Hungarian’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 227–252

Marácz, László 1986b, ‘On coreferential and bound variable interpretation in non-configurational languages’, Theoretical Linguistic Research 2: 85–172Google Scholar

Marácz, László 1988, ‘Locality and correspondence effects in Hungarian’, in A. Cardinaletti, G. Cinque, and G. Giusti (eds.), Annali di Ca' Foscari, Constituent Structure. Papers from the 1987 GLOW Conference, Venezia, pp. 203–237

Marácz, László 1989, Asymmetries in Hungarian, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen

May, Robert 1985, Logical Form, Its Structure and Derivation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Molnár, Valéria 1998, ‘Topic in focus: the syntax, phonology, semantics, and pragmatics of the so-called “contrastive topic” in Hungarian and German’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45: 89–166CrossRef

Olsvay, Csaba 1999, ‘The Hungarian verbal complex: an alternative approach’, paper presented at the workshop on verb clusters Dutch–Hungarian Study Center, Öttevény, Oct. 1999

Olsvay, Csaba 2000a, ‘Formális jegyek egyeztetése a magyar nemsemleges mondatokban’, in Büky and Maleczki (eds.) 2000, pp. 119–152

Olsvay, Csaba 2000b, Negative Quantifiers in the Hungarian Sentence, MA Thesis, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest

Payne, John and Erika Chisarik 2000, ‘Demonstrative constructions in Hungarian’, in Alberti and Kenesei (eds.) 2000, pp. 179–198

Pesetsky, David 1987, ‘Wh-in-situ: movement and unselective binding’, in Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 98–129

Piñon, Christopher 1992, ‘Heads in the focus field’, in Kenesei and Pléh (eds.) 1992, pp. 99–122

Piñon, Christopher 1995, ‘Around the progressive in Hungarian’, in Kenesei (ed.) 1995, pp. 153–191

Puskás, Genovéva 1998, ‘On the Neg Criterion in Hungarian’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45: 167–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Puskás, Genovéva 2000, Word Order in Hungarian: The Syntax of A′ Positions, Amsterdam: John Benjamins

Rebrus, Péter 2000, ‘Morfofonológiai jelenségek a magyarban’, in Kiefer (ed.) 2000, pp. 763–949

Reinhart, Tanya 1983, Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation, London: Croom Helm

Riemsdijk, Henk van 1998, ‘Categorial feature magnetism: the endocentricity and distribution of projections’, Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 2: 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rouveret, Alain 1991, ‘Functional categories and agreement’, The Linguistic Review 8, 353–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stechow, Arnim von and Susanne Uhmann 1986, ‘Some remarks on focus projection’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 295–320

Stowell, Timothy 1981, Origins of Phrase Structure, Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge, MA: MIT

Surányi, Balázs 2000, ‘Operator and head movement in Hungarian: from checking to marking’, DOXIMP 4, Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Working Papers in the Theory of Grammar 7, 1: 35–45Google Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1980, ‘Az aktuális mondattagolás szemantikájához’, Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 82: 59–82Google Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1981a, ‘The semantics of topic-focus articulation’, in Jan Groenendijk et al. (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam: Matematisch Centrum

Szabolcsi, Anna 1981b, ‘The possessive construction in Hungarian: a configurational category in a non-configurational language’, Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 31, 261–289Google Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1981c, ‘Compositionality in focus’, Folia Linguistica 15: 141–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1983a, ‘Focussing properties, or the trap of first order’, Theoretical Linguistics 10: 125–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1983b, ‘The possessor that ran away from home’, The Linguistic Review 3: 89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1986, ‘From definiteness effect to lexical integrity’, in Abraham and de Meij (eds.) 1986, pp. 321–348

Szabolcsi, Anna 1992a, A birtokos szerkezet és az egzisztenciális mondat, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó

Szabolcsi, Anna 1992b, ‘Subject suppression or lexical PRO? The case of derived nominals in Hungarian’, Lingua 86, 149–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1994a, ‘The noun phrase’, in Kiefer and É. Kiss (eds.) 1994, pp. 179–274

Szabolcsi, Anna 1994b, ‘All quantifiers are not equal: the case of focus’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 42: 171–187Google Scholar

Szabolcsi, Anna 1997a, ‘Strategies for scope taking’, in Szabolcsi (ed.) 1997b, pp. 109–154

Szabolcsi, Anna (ed.) 1997b, Ways of Scope Taking, Dordrecht: Kluwer

Szabolcsi, Anna and Tibor Laczkó 1992, ‘A főnévi csoport szerkezete’, in Kiefer (ed.), pp. 179–298

Szendrői, Kriszta 1999, ‘Stress driven Focus Movement and stress avoiding verbs’, paper presented at the Workshop on verb clusters Dutch–Hungarian Study Center, Öttevény, Oct. 1999

Tóth, Ildikó 1999, ‘Negative polarity item licensing in Hungarian’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 46: 119–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tóth, Ildikó 2000a, Inflected infinitives in Hungarian, Ph.D. dissertation, Tilburg University

Tóth, Ildikó 2000b, ‘-va and -ván participles in Hungarian’, in Alberti and Kenesei (eds.) 2000, pp. 237–258

Varga, László 1999, ‘Rhythmical variation in Hungarian’, Phonology 15, 227–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vogel, Irene and Kenesei, István 1987, ‘The interface between phonology and other components of grammar’, Phonology 4: 243–263Google Scholar

Williams, Edwin 1987, ‘Implicit arguments, the binding theory, and control’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5: 151–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zanuttini, Raffaela 1997, Negation and Clausal Structure, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Zolnay, Gyula 1926, ‘Mondatátszövődés’, Értekezések a Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Nyelv- és Széptudományi Osztálya Köréből23Google Scholar