Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 The minimalist project
- 2 Some architectural issues in a minimalist setting
- 3 Theta domains
- 4 Case domains
- 5 Movement and minimality effects
- 6 Phrase structure
- 7 Linearization
- 8 Binding Theory
- 9 Feature interpretability and feature checking
- 10 Derivational economy
- Glossary of minimalist definitions
- References
- Language index
- Name index
- Subject index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 The minimalist project
- 2 Some architectural issues in a minimalist setting
- 3 Theta domains
- 4 Case domains
- 5 Movement and minimality effects
- 6 Phrase structure
- 7 Linearization
- 8 Binding Theory
- 9 Feature interpretability and feature checking
- 10 Derivational economy
- Glossary of minimalist definitions
- References
- Language index
- Name index
- Subject index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Understanding Minimalism , pp. 369 - 391Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005
References
Abels, K. 2003. “Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Abney, S. R. 1987. “The noun phrase in its sentential aspect,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1995. Deutsche Syntax im Sprachenvergleich: Grundlegung einer typologischen Syntax des Deutschen, Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
and . 2001. Proto-Properties and Grammatical Encoding: A Correspondence Theory of Argument Selection, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Adger, D. 1994. “Functional heads and interpretation,” PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.
and . 2005. “Merge and move: Wh-dependencies revisited,” Linguistic Inquiry 36, 161–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2004. “Gapping, pseudogapping and sideward movement,” Studia Linguistica 58, 185–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albizu, P. 1997. “The syntax of person agreement,” PhD thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Albizu, P.1998. “Generalized person-case constraint: A case for a syntax-driven inflectional morphology”, in A. Mendikoetxea and M. Uribe-Etxebarria (eds.), Theoretical Issues on the Morphology-Syntax Interface, San Sebastian: Supplements of the Anuario del Seminario Julio de Urquijo, 1–34.
1997. Adverb Placement: A Case Study in Antisymmetric Syntax, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoun, J. 1979. “On government, case marking, and clitic placement,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Aoun, J.1982. “On the logical nature of the binding principles: Quantifier lowering, double raising of there and the notion empty element,” in and (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 12, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA Publications, 16–35.Google Scholar
, , and . 1994. “Agreement, word order, and conjunction in some varieties of Arabic,” Linguistic Inquiry 25, 195–220.Google Scholar
and . 1985. “On non-overt operators,” Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 10, 17–36.Google Scholar
Aoun, J. and J. Nunes. 1997. “Vehicle change and Move-F,” paper presented at the Colloque de syntaxe et sémantique à Paris, Université de Paris 7, October 16–18, 1997. [To appear as “Vehicle change phenomena as an argument for Move-F,” Linguistic Inquiry.]
Arnold, M. D. 1995. “Case, periphrastic do, and the loss of verb movement in English,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Authier, J.-M. 1988. “The syntax of unselective binding,” PhD thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
1991. “V-governed expletives, case theory, and the projection principle,” Linguistic Inquiry 22, 721–42.Google Scholar
1962. “The order of elements in a transformational grammar of German,” Language 38, 263–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1978. Introduction to Generative-Transformational Syntax, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function changing, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C.1997. “Thematic roles and grammatical categories,” in (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 73–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001. The Atoms of Language: The Mind's Hidden Rules of Grammar, New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
2003. Lexical Categories: Verbs, Nouns, and Adjectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.). 2001. The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barss, A. 1986. “Chains and anaphoric dependencies,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Bashir, E. 1987. “Agreement in Kashmiri infinitive complements,” in , , and (eds.), Select Papers from SALA-7, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 13–27.Google Scholar
Bastos, A. 2001. “Fazer, eu faço! Topicalização de constituintes verbais en português brasileiro,” MA thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Bayer, J. 1987. “The syntax of scalar predicates and so-called ‘floating quantifiers’,” ms., Max-Plank-Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen.
1990. Generalized Verb Movement: Aspects of Verb Syntax, Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2004. Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. III, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1988. “Psych-verbs and θ-theory,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6, 291–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergvall, V. L. 1987. “The position and properties of in situ and right-moved questions in Kikuyu,” in (ed.), Current Approaches to African Linguistics, Vol. IV, Dordrecht: Foris, 37–51.Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. 2001. “The DP hypothesis: Identifying clausal properties in the nominal domain,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 536–61.
den Besten, H. 1977. “On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive verbs,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge and Universiteit van Amsterdam. [Appeared in den Besten (1989).]
den Besten, H.1985. “The ergative hypothesis and free word order in Dutch and German,” in (ed.), Studies in German Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris, 23–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
den Besten, H.1989. “Studies in West Germanic syntax,” PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Tilburg.
1995a. “In terms of merge: Copy and head movement,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27, 41–64.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, J. D.1995b. “Morphosyntax: The syntax of verbal inflection,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
2002. “A-chains at the PF-interface: Copies and ‘covert’ movement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20, 197–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, J. D.2003. “Floating quantifiers: Handle with care,” in and (eds.), The Second Glot International State-of-the-Art Book, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 107–48.Google Scholar
and . 1997. “Inter-arboreal operations: Head-movement and the extension requirement,” Linguistic Inquiry 28, 345–56.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, J. D. and S. Wurmbrand. 2003. “Relativizing phases,” ms., McGill University, Montreal/University of Connecticut, Storrs. [To appear as “Domains of Agreement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory.]
Boeckx, C. 2000. “EPP eliminated,” ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Boeckx, C.2002. “On labels in syntax,” ms., University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Boeckx, C.2004. “Bare syntax,” ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Boeckx, C. and K. K. Grohmann. 2003. “Introduction,” in and (eds.), Multiple Wh-Fronting, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C. and K. K. Grohmann2004. “Putting phases into perspective,” ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and University of Cyprus, Nicosia. [To appear in Syntax.]
and . 2003. “Reply to ‘Control is not movement’,” Linguistic Inquiry 34, 269–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C., N. Hornstein, and J. Nunes. 2004. “Overt copies in reflexive and control structures: A movement analysis,” ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, University of Maryland, College Park, and Universidade de São Paulo.
Bonet, E. 1991. “Morphology after syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1994. “D-structure, theta criterion, and movement into theta positions,” Linguistic Analysis 24, 247–86.Google Scholar
1997. The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation: An Economy Approach, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bošković, Ž.1998. “LF movement and the minimalist program”, in and (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 28, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA Publications, 43–57.Google Scholar
2001. On the Nature of the Syntax-Phonology Interface: Cliticization and Related Phenomena. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Bošković, Ž.2003. “On left branch extraction,” in , , , , and (eds.), Investigations into Formal Slavic Linguistics: Contributions of the Fourth European Conference on Formal Description of Slavic Languages – FDSL IV, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 543–77.Google Scholar
2004. “Be careful where you float your quantifiers,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž. and J. Nunes. 2004. “The copy theory of movement: A view from PF,” ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs and Universidade de São Paulo.
Bowers, J. S. 1973. “Grammatical relations,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 1981 as The Theory of Grammatical Relations, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.]
1982. “The head-selector theory of lexical specifications and the nonexistence of coarse categories,” Linguistic Analysis 10, 321–25.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. 1972. “On sentence stress and syntactic transformations,” in (ed.), Contributions to Generative Phonology, Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 73–107.Google Scholar
Browning, M. A. 1987. “Null operator constructions,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Bruening, B. 2001. Syntax at the edge: Cross-clausal phenomena and the Syntax of Passamaquoddy. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
and . 2004. The Syntax and Semantics of Split Constructions: A Comparative Study, Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cann, R. 1999. “Specifiers as secondary heads,” in , , , and (eds.), Specifiers: Minimalist Approaches, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21–45.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. and M. Starke. 1999. “The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns,” in van Riemsdijk (1999), 145–233.
Carston, R. 1996. “The architecture of the mind: Modularity and modularization,” in (ed.), Cognitive Science: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell, 53–83.Google Scholar
, , and . 1999. “Merge over move and the extended projection principle,” University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 8, 63–103.Google Scholar
Chametzky, R. A.2003. “Phrase structure,” in (ed.), Minimalist Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell, 192–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, L. 1997. “Wh-in situ phenomena in French,” MA thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Cheng, L. L.-S. 1991. “On the typology of wh-questions,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 1997, New York, NY: Garland.]
Chomsky, N. 1955. “The logical structure of linguistic theory,” ms., Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Revised 1956 manuscript published in part as The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory by New York, NY: Plenum, 1975; Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1985.]
Chomsky, N.1970. “Remarks on nominalizations,” in and (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company, 184–221.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1973. “Conditions on transformations,” in and (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 232–86.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1977. “On wh-movement,” in , , and (eds.), Formal Syntax, New York, NY: Academic Press, 71–132.Google Scholar
1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1991. “Some notes on economy of derivation and representation,” in (ed), Principles and Parameters in Generative Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 417–54. [Reprinted in Chomsky (1995), 129–66.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1993. “A minimalist program for linguistic theory,” in and (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52. [Reprinted in Chomsky (1995), 167–217.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1999. “Derivation by phase,” MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18. [Revised version appeared as Chomsky 2001.]
Chomsky, N.2000. “Minimalist inquiries: The framework,” in , , and (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89–155.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.2001. “Derivation by phase,” in (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.2004. “Beyond explanatory adequacy,” in Belletti (2004), 104–31.
Chomsky, N.2005b. “On phases,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [To appear in et al. (eds.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. and H. Lasnik.1993. “The theory of principles and parameters,” in , , , and (eds.), Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 506–69. [Reprinted in Chomsky (1995), 13–127.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. The Design of Agreement: Evidence from Chamorro, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 1984. “A′-bound pro vs. variable,” ms., Università di Venezia.
1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2002. The Structure of IP and DP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. I, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2005. “On the nature of merge: external merge, internal merge, and parallel merge,” Linguistic Inquiry 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1993. “A computational model of language learnability and language change,” Linguistic Inquiry 24, 299–345.Google Scholar
Collins, C.2002. “Eliminating labels,” in and (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell, 42–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1996. “VP-internal structure and object shift in Icelandic,” Linguistic Inquiry 27, 391–444.Google Scholar
1987. “Small clauses in Spanish and English,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 5, 225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. “On null operator structures,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 11, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1996. Chomsky's Universal Grammar: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell, second edition.Google Scholar
Corver, N. 1990. “The syntax of left branch extractions,” PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Tilburg.
and . 1999. An Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Language Acquisition, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
and . 2001. “Nature, nurture and Universal Grammar,” Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 139–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1998. Investigations in Universal Grammar: A Guide to Experiments on the Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1977. Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern-Day “Wild Child”, New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Davis, H. 2001. “Is there a pronominal argument parameter?,” paper presented at the Workshop on the Role of Agreement in Argument Structure, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics/OTS, Universiteit Utrecht, August 31–September 1, 2001.
deGraff, M. 1999a. “Creolization, language change, and language acquisition: A prolegomenon,” in de Graff (1999b), 1–46.
(ed.). 1999b. Language Creation and Language Change: Creolization, Diachrony, and Development, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
DeLancey, S. 1997. “What an innatist argument should look like,” in , , and (eds.), SKY 1997 (Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland), Helsinki: Linguistic Association of Finland, 7–24.Google Scholar
1995a. Particles: On the Syntax of Verb-Particle, Triadic and Causative Constructions, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 2002. “From hell to polarity: ‘Aggressively non-D-linked’ wh-phrases as polarity items,” Linguistic Inquiry 33, 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
den Dikken, M. and R. Sybesma. 1998. “Take serials light up the middle,” ms. CUNY Graduate Center, New York and Universiteit Leiden.
1991. “Thematic proto-roles, argument selection, and lexical semantic defaults,” Language 67, 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. “Charting the learning path: Cues to parameter setting,” Linguistic Inquiry 29, 27–67.Google Scholar
Eliseu, A. 1984. “Trabalho de síntese para provas de aptidão pedagógica e capacidade científica,” ms., Universidade de Lisboa.
1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure-Preserving, and Local Transformations, New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Emonds, J. E. and R. Ostler. 2005. “Double object constructions,” in and (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1999. “Un-principled syntax: The derivation of syntactic relations,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 317–45.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1998. A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. D. and T. D. Seely. 2002. “Rule applications as cycles in a level-free syntax,” in and (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell, 65–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabb, N. 1984. “Syntactic affixation,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Fanselow, G. 1992. “ ‘Ergative’ Verben und die Struktur des deutschen Mittelfelds,” in (ed.), Deutsche Syntax: Ansichten und Aussichten, Berlin: de Gruyter, 276–303.Google Scholar
Fassi Fehri, A. 1980. “Some complement phenomena in Arabic, lexical grammar, the complementizer phrase hypothesis and the non-accessibility condition,” ms., University of Rabat.
and . 2001. “Expletives as arguments: Germanic existential sentences revisited,” Linguistische Berichte 187, 289–324.Google Scholar
2000. “Uma observação sobre a lugar da teoria da ligação e do critério temático dentro do programa minimalista,” DELTA 16.1, 139–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. D. 2001. “Setting syntactic parameters,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 730–67.
1999. “Reconstruction, binding theory, and the interpretation of chains,” Linguistic Inquiry 30, 157–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1999. “Cyclic computation, a computationally efficient minimalist syntax,” Syntax 2, 1–27.CrossRef
2002. Phrase Structure Composition and Syntactic Dependencies, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Freidin, R.1986. “Fundamental issues in the theory of binding,” in (ed.), Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, Dordrecht: Reidel, 151–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 1991. Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Freidin, R.1999. “Cyclicity and minimalism,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 95–126.Google Scholar
Fukui, N. 1986. “A theory of category projection and its applications,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1988. “Deriving the differences between English and Japanese: A case study in parametric syntax,” English Linguistics 5, 249–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002. General Red Transformations and Beyond: Reflections on Minimalist Syntax, Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
1981. “Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure,” Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155–84.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1982. “Coordination and transformational grammar,” Linguistic Inquiry 13, 663–77.Google Scholar
1991. Syntactic Variables: Resumptive Pronouns and A′-Binding in Palauan, Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1989. “Floating quantifiers, scrambling, and configurationality,” Linguistic Inquiry 20, 633–41.Google Scholar
1995. “Syntax outranks phonology: Evidence from Ancient Greek,” Phonology 12, 343–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002. African American English: A Linguistic Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. “Syntactic inquiries into discourse restrictions on multiple interrogatives,” Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 42, 1–60.Google Scholar
2000a. “Towards a syntactic understanding of prosodically reduced pronouns,” Theoretical Linguistics 25, 149–84.Google Scholar
Grohmann, K. K.2000b. “Prolific peripheries: A radical view from the left,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Grohmann, K. K.2003a. “German is a multiple wh-fronting language!” in and (eds.), Multiple Wh-Fronting, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 99–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003b. Prolific Domains: On the Anti-Locality of Movement Dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003c. “Successive cyclicity under (anti-)local considerations,” Syntax 6, 260–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grohmann, K. K.2004. “Natural relations,” ms., University of Cyprus, Nicosia.
Grohmann, K. K., J. Drury, and J. C. Castillo. 2000. “No more EPP,” in and (eds.), WCCFL 19: Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 153–66.Google Scholar
2003. “A unified theory of ‘standard’ and ‘transparent’ free relatives,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21, 247–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haïk, I. 1985. “The syntax of operators,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Hale, K. and S. J. Keyser. 1993. “On argument structure and the lexical expression of grammatical relations,” in and (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 53–110.Google Scholar
Halle, M. and A. Marantz. 1993. “Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection,” in and (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 111–76.Google Scholar
Harbert, W. 1995. “Binding theory, control, and pro,” in Webelhuth (1995b), 177–240.
1995. Belfast English and Standard English: Dialect Variation and Parameter Setting, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hicks, G. 2003. “ ‘So easy to look at, so hard to define’: Tough movement in the minimalist framework,” MA thesis, University of York.
and . 1981. “Questions, quantifiers, and crossing,” The Linguistic Review 1, 41–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiraiwa, K. 2003. “Cyclic locality”, ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1988. Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. 1: Theory and Structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2000. An Introduction to Pidgins and Creoles, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, A. 1986. “Word order and syntactic features in the Scandinavian languages and English,” PhD thesis, Stockholms Universitet.
2000. “Scandinavian stylistic fronting: how any category can become an expletive,” Linguistic Inquiry 31, 445–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, A.2005. “Stylistic Fronting,” in and (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
and . 1995. The Role of Inflection in Scandinavian Syntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holmer, A. 2002. “The Iberian-Caucasian connection in a typological perspective,” ms., Lunds Universitet.
Hornstein, N.2000. “Existentials, A-chains, and reconstruction,” in DELTA16 special, 45–79.
Hornstein, N.2003. “On control”, in (ed.), Minimalist Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell, 6–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2004. “PRO gate and movement,” Proceedings of the 25th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 8.1, 33–46.Google Scholar
Hornstein, N. and D. W. Lightfoot. 1981. “Introduction,” in and (eds.), Explanation in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, London: Longman, 9–31.Google Scholar
and . 2002. “On asymmetries between parasitic gap and across-the-board constructions,” Syntax 5, 26–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. 1982. “Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1993. “Reconstruction and the structure of VP: Some theoretical consequences,” Linguistic Inquiry 24, 103–38.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 1990. The Phonology-Syntax Connection, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Inkelas, S. and D. Zec1995. “Syntax-phonology interface,” in (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory, Oxford: Blackwell, 535–49.Google Scholar
1990. “On Larson's account of the double object construction,” Linguistic Inquiry 21, 427–54.Google Scholar
Janda, R. D. 1980. “On certain constructions of English's,” in , , , , , , , and (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, CA: BLS, 324–36.Google Scholar
2000. Biolinguistics: Exploring the Biology of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1997. “A critique of the minimalist program,” Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 273–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. F. 1985. “Syntax and thematics of infinitival adjuncts,” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
1991. “Stylistic fronting in Icelandic,” Scandinavian Working Papers in Linguistics 48, 1–43.Google Scholar
1999. “Strong pronouns, weak pronominals and the null subject parameter,” Probus 11, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kato, M. 2004. “Two types of wh-in-situ in Brazilian Portuguese,” paper presented at the Georgetown University Round Table: Comparative and Cross-Linguistic Research in Syntax, Semantics, and Computational Linguistics (GURT 2004), March 26–29, 2004.
Kato, M. and J. Nunes. 1998. “Two sources for relative clause formation in Brazilian Portuguese,” paper presented at the Eighth Colloquium on Generative Grammar, Universidade de Lisboa, April 19–22, 1998.
Kayne, R. S.1976. “French relative que,” in and (eds.), Current Studies in Romance Linguistics, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 255–99.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. S.1985. “L'accord du participe passé en francais et en italien,” Modèles Linguistiques 7, 73–89. [English version published as “Past participle agreement in French and Italian,” in Kayne (2000), 10–24.]
Kayne, R. S.,1989. “Facets of Romance past participle agreement,” in (ed.), Dialect Variation and the Theory of Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris, 85–104. [Reprinted in Kayne (2000), 25–39.]Google Scholar
1991. “Romance clitics, verb movement, and PRO,” Linguistic Inquiry 22, 647–86. [Reprinted in Kayne (2000), 60–97.]Google Scholar
Kiguchi, H. 2002. “Syntax unchained,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Kitagawa, Y. 1986. “Subjects in Japanese and English,” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
1993. “Object agreement phrases and the split VP hypothesis,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 99–148.Google Scholar
1984. The Syntax of Verbs: From Verb Movement in the Kru Languages to Universal Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1996. “Severing the external argument from its verb,” in and (eds.), Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 109–38.Google Scholar
Kural, M. and G. Tsoulas. 2005. “Indices and the theory of grammar,” ms., University of California, Irvine and University of York.
1988. “Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese,” Lingvisticae Investigationes 12, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W., P. Cohen, C. Robins, and J. Lewis. 1968. “A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Puerto Rican Speakers in New York City,” Cooperative Research Report 3288, Vols. I and II, Philadelphia, PA: US Regional Survey (Linguistics Laboratory, University of Pennsylvania).
1998. Comparative Studies in Word Order Variation: Adverbs, Pronouns and Clause Structure in Romance and Germanic, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. “Unergatives that assign ergative, unaccusatives that assign accusative,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 149–72.Google Scholar
Landau, I. 1999. “Elements of control,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 2001 as Elements of Control: Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Constructions, Dordrecht: Kluwer.]
1990. “Double objects revisited: Reply to Jackendoff,” Linguistic Inquiry 21, 589–632.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. 1981. “Restricting the theory of transformations: A case study,” in and (eds.), Explanations in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, London: Longman, 152–73. [Reprinted in Lasnik, H. 1990. Essays on Restrictiveness and Learnability, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 125–45.]Google Scholar
1992a. “Case and expletives: Notes toward a parametric account,” Linguistic Inquiry 23, 381–405.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.1992b. “Two notes on control and binding,” in , , , and (eds.), Control and Grammar, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 235–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, H.1995a. “Verbal morphology: Syntactic Structures meets the minimalist program,” in and (eds.), Evolution and Revolution in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Carlos Otero, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 251–75. [Reprinted in Lasnik (1999), 97–119.]Google Scholar
1995b. “A note on pseudogapping,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27, 143–63. [Reprinted in Lasnik (1999), 151–74.]Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.1995c. “Last resort and Attract F,” in , , and (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 62–81.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.1995d. “Last resort,” in S. Haraguchi and M. Funaki (eds.), Minimalism and Linguistic Theory, Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo Publishing, 1–32.
1998. “Some reconstruction riddles,” Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 5.1, 83–98.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.2001a. “Derivation vs. representation in modern transformational syntax,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 197–217.
with and . 2000. Syntactic Structures Revisited: Contemporary Lectures on Classic Transformational Theory, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. and M. Saito1991. “On the subject of infinitives,” in , , and (eds.), Papers from the 27th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 1991. Part 1: The General Session, Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society, 324–43.Google Scholar
and 1992. Move α: Conditions on Its Applications and Outputs, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
and . 1988. A Course in GB Syntax: Lectures on Binding and Empty Categories, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
and with . 2005. A Course in Minimalist Syntax: Foundations and Prospects, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1983. “A distributional difference between reciprocals and reflexives,” Linguistic Inquiry 14, 723–30.Google Scholar
Lebeaux, D.1988. “Language acquisition and the form of the grammar.” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [Published 2000 as Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.]
Lebeaux, D.1991. “Relative clauses, licensing, and the nature of the derivation,” in (ed.), Perspective on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 209–39.Google Scholar
1995. “Where does the binding theory apply?,” University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 3, 63–88.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, C. 1991. “Take serial verb constructions in Fon,” in (ed.), Serial Verbs: Grammatical, Comparative and Cognitive Approaches, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 37–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003. “Some interface properties of the phase,” Linguistic Inquiry 34, 506–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1995. Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levin, N. S. 1978. “Some identity-of-sense deletions puzzle me. Do they you?” in , , and (eds.), Papers from the Fourteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society, 229–40.Google Scholar
Levin, N. S.1979. “Main verb ellipsis in spoken English,” PhD thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus. [Published 1986 as Main Verb Ellipsis in Spoken English, New York, NY: Garland.]
1984. “A note on right node raising, tough constructions and reanalysis rules,” Linguistic Analysis 13, 159–72.Google Scholar
Lidz, J. 2003. “Causation and reflexivity in Kannada,” in and (eds.), Clause Structure in South Asian Languages, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 93–130.Google Scholar
1991. How to Set Parameters: Arguments from Language Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1999. The Development of Language: Acquisition, Change and Evolution, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lin, T.-H. 2001. “Light verb syntax and the theory of phrase structure,” PhD thesis, University of California, Irvine.
1935. The Burushaski Language, Vol. I: Introduction and Grammar. Oslo: Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning.Google Scholar
1968. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992. Locality: A Theory and Some of Its Empirical Consequences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
and . 2000. “A minimalist approach to A-movement and control,” Lingua 110, 409–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1987. “Parameters, binding theory, and learnability,” Linguistic Inquiry 18, 413–44.Google Scholar
Marácz, L. 1989. “Asymmetries in Hungarian,” PhD thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
1997. “No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon,” Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2, 201–25.Google Scholar
Martin, R. 1996. “A minimalist theory of PRO,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Martin, R. and J. Uriagereka. 1999. “Lectures on dynamic syntax,” lecture series given at the LSA Summer Institute, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, June 21–July 30, 1999.
Mathieu, E. 2002. “The syntax of non-canonical quantification: A comparative study,” PhD thesis, University College London.
Matushansky, O. 2003. “Going through a phase,” ms., CNRS/Université de Paris 8.
McCawley, J. 1981. “An un-syntax,” in and (eds.), Current Approaches to Syntax, New York, NY: Academic Press, 167–93.Google Scholar
McCloskey, J. 1990. “Resumptive pronouns, A-bar binding, and levels of representation in Irish,” in (ed.), The Syntax of the Modern Celtic Languages, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 199–256.Google Scholar
McCloskey, J.1997. “Subjecthood and subject positions,” in (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 197–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, J.2001. “On the distribution of subject properties in Irish,” in and (eds.), Objects and Other Subjects: Grammatical Functions, Functional Categories and Configurationality, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 157–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, J.2002. “Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of operations,” in and (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell, 184–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, D. 1986. “Conditions on wh-chains,” PhD thesis, CUNY Graduate Center, New York.
1989. “Partial and multiple wh-movement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 7, 565–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J. 1995. “Parameters in acquisition,” in and (eds.), The Handbook of Child Language, Oxford: Blackwell, 10–35.Google Scholar
Merchant, J. 1996. “Object scrambling and quantifier float in German,” in (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 26, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA, 179–93.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. and N. Chomsky. 1963. “Finitary models of language users,” in , , and (eds.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. II, New York, NY: Wiley, 419–91.Google Scholar
1994. “A s interrogativas no português brasileiro e o critério-wh,” Letras de Hoje 96, 19–33.Google Scholar
2000. The Light Verb Construction in Japanese: The Role of the Verbal Noun, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohammad, M. 1990. “The sentence structure of Arabic,” PhD thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Moro, A. 1989. “There/Cias raised predicates,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Müller, G. 2003. “Optionality in optimality-theoretic syntax,” in and (eds.), The Second Glot International State-of-the-Art Book, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 289–321.Google Scholar
2004. “Verb second as vP-first,” The Journal of Comparative Germanic Syntax 7, 179–234.Google Scholar
Munn, A. 1993. “Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Nasu, N. 2002. “Aspects of the syntax of A-movement: A study of English infinitival constructions and related phenomena,” PhD thesis, University of Essex, Colchester.
Neeleman, A. 1994. “Complex predicates,” PhD thesis, Universiteit Utrecht.
Neidle, C., J. Kegl, B. Bahan, D. Aarons, and D. MacLaughlin. 1997. “Rightward wh–movement in American Sign Language,” in , , and (eds.), Rightward Movement, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 247–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nissenbaum, J. 2000. “Investigations of covert phrase movement,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Nunes, J. 1995. “The copy theory of movement and linearization of chains in the minimalist program,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
1998. “Bare X′-theory and structures formed by movement,” Linguistic Inquiry 29, 160–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, J.1999. “Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 217–49.Google Scholar
Nunes, J. and E. Thompson. 1998. “Appendix,” in Uriagereka (1998), 497–521.
and . 2005. “Morphological identity in ellipsis,” Leiden Papers in Linguistics 2.2, 29–42.Google Scholar
Obenauer, H.-G.1994. “Aspects de la syntaxe A-barre: Effets d'intervention et mouvement des quantifieurs,” Thèse de doctorat d'Etat, Université de Paris VIII.
Oishi, M. 1990. “Conceptual problems of upward X-bar theory,” ms., Tohoku Gakuin University.
1997. “Procrastinate to feature strength,” Interdisciplinary Information Sciences 3, 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003. “When linearity meets bare phrase structure,” Current Issues in Linguistics: Special Publications of the English Linguistics Society of Japan, 2, 18–41.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J. 1995. “The syntax of complementation: On the relation between syntactic structure and selection,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
and . 1998. “On the syntactic nature of the me-lui and the person-case constraint,” Anuario del Seminario Julio de Urquijo XXXII–2, 415–33.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J., J. Uriagereka, and M. Uribe-Etxebarria. 1994. “Word order and wh-movement: Towards a parametric account,” paper presented at the 17th GLOW Colloquium, Vienna, April 6–8, 1994.
Ouhalla, J. 1994. “Verb movement and word order in Arabic,” in and (eds.), Verb Movement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1971. Deep and Surface Constraints in Generative Grammar, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D.1978. “Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis,” in , , and (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, CA: University of California, BLS, 157–89.Google Scholar
and . 1979. Syntactic Argumentation and the Structure of English, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. 1987. “Wh-in situ: Movement and unselective binding,” in and (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 98–129.Google Scholar
and . 1997. “Wh-movement and the position of Spec-CP: Evidence from American Sign Language,” Language 73, 18–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pires, A. 2001. “The syntax of gerunds and infinitives: Subjects, case and control,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
and . 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. 1966. “On the so-called ‘pronouns’ in English,” Monograph Series in Language and Linguistics19, 177–206. [Reprinted in D. A. Reibel and S. A. Schane (eds.). 1969. Modern Studies in English, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 201–24 and in R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.). 1970. Readings in Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company, 56–82.]
1974. On Raising: One Rule of English Grammar and Its Theoretical Implications, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1981. Transformational Syntax: A Student's Guide to Chomsky's Extended Standard Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1988. Transformational Grammar: A First Course, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. 1976. “The syntactic domain of anaphora,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Richards, M. D. 2004. “Object Shift and Scrambling in North and West Germanic: A case study in symmetrical Syntax,” PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
2001. Movement in Language: Interactions and Architectures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Richards, N.2002. “A distinctness condition on linearization,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1978. A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: The Binding Nature of Prepositional Phrases, Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. 1991. “Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew,” in (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 37–62.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. 1980. “Negation, wh-movement and the pro-drop parameter,” paper presented at the 3rd GLOW Colloquium, Max-Planck Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen, April 10–13, 1980. [Published as “Negation, wh-movement and the null-subject parameter” in Rizzi (1982), 117–84.]
Rizzi, L.1997. “The fine structure of the left periphery,” in (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 281–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L.2001. ‘Relativized minimality effects’, in Baltin and Collins (2001), 89–110.
(ed.). 2004. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. II, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1985. “Agreement parameters and the development of English modal auxiliaries,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3, 21–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French, Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
1998. “Have/Be raising, Move F, and procrastinate,” Linguistic Inquiry 29, 113–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. G.2001. “Head movement,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 113–47.
1967. The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. S.1970. “A principle governing deletion in English sentential complementation,” in and (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company, 20–29.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. 1967. “Constraints on variables in syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 1986 as Infinite Syntax!, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.]
Rothstein, S. D. 1995. “Small clauses and copular constructions,” in and (eds.), Small Clauses, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 27–48.Google Scholar
Rubin, E. 2002. “The structure of modifiers,” ms., University of Utah, Salt Lake City. [To appear with Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]
1988a. “On multiple questions and multiple wh-fronting,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6, 445–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudin, C.1988b. “Finiteness and opacity: Evidence from the Balkans,” in , , and (eds.), Studies in Syntactic Typology, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runner, J. 1995. “Noun phrase licensing and interpretation,” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [Published 1998 as Noun Phrase Licensing, New York, NY: Garland.]
Runner, J.2005. “The accusative plus infinitive construction in English,” in and (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1996. Restrukturierung und Lokalität: Universelle Beschränkungen für Wortstellungsvarianten, Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Sabel, J.1998. “Principles and parameters of wh-movement,” Habilitationsschrift, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.
Sabel, J.2000. “Expletives as features,” in and (eds.), WCCFL 19: Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 411–24.Google Scholar
1991. “Wh-scope mechanisms in Bahasa Indonesia,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 15, 183–218.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1985. “Coordination and how to distinguish categories,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3, 117–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salo, P. 2003. “Causatives and the empty lexicon: A minimalist perspective,” PhD thesis, University of Helsinki.
Schachter, P. 1976. “The subject in Philippine languages: Topic, actor, actor-topic, or none of the above?,” in (ed.), Subject and Topic, New York, NY: Academic Press, 493–518.Google Scholar
Schachter, P.1977. “Reference-related and role-related properties of subjects,” in and (eds.), Grammatical Relations, New York, NY: Academic Press, 279–306.Google Scholar
1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
, , and . 1996. “An optimality-theoretic approach to variation in negative inversion in AAVE,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 14, 591–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000. Wh-Movement and the Theory of Feature-Checking. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1995. The Mind of a Savant: Language-Learning and Modularity, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Speas, M. 1986. “Adjunctions and projections in syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Speas, M.1991. “Generalized transformations and the S-structure position of adjuncts,” in (ed.), Perspective on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 241–57.Google Scholar
1988. “A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure,” Linguistic Inquiry 19, 425–49.Google Scholar
Starke, M. 2001. “Move dissolves into merge: A theory of locality,” PhD thesis, Université de Genève.
Stowell, T. 1981. “Origins of phrase structure,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Stowell, T.1984. “Null operators and the theory of proper government,” ms., University of California, Los Angeles.
Sultan, U. 2002. “On a few case and agreement puzzles in Standard Arabic,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Svenonius, P.2001. “Locality, phases, and the cycle,” ms., Universitetet i Tromsø.
Svenonius, P.2004. “On the edge”, in , , and (eds.), Peripheries, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 259–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1983. “The possessor that ran away from home,” The Linguistic Review 3, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, D. 1994. “Minimality of movement,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Taraldsen, K. T. 1981. “On the theoretical interpretation of a class of ‘marked’ extractions,” in , , and (eds.), The Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar, Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore, 475–516.Google Scholar
Thiersch, C. 1978. “Topics in German syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Travis, L. deMena. 1984. “Parameters and effects of word order variation,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Truckenbrodt, H. 1995. “Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1999. “On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases,” Linguistic Inquiry 30, 219–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992. “Postverbal focus constructions in Chadic,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 10, 303–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ura, H. 1994. “Varieties of raising and the feature-based theory of movement,” MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics7.
Uriagereka, J. 1988. “On government,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
1997. “Multiple spell-out,” Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 40, 109–35.Google Scholar
1998. Rhyme and Reason: An Introduction to Minimalist Syntax, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J.1999a. “Comments on ‘Minimalist inquiries: The framework’,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Uriagereka, J.1999c. “Multiple spell-out,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 251–82.Google Scholar
1999d. “Minimal restrictions on Basque movement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17, 403–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, J.2000b. “Comments on ‘Derivation by Phase’,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Uriagereka, J.2001. “Pure adjuncts,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Uribe-Etxebarria, M. 1989. “Some notes on the structure of IP in Basque,” ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
1986. “An empty category as the subject of tensed S in English,” Linguistic Inquiry 17, 581–86.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J.-R. 1982. “Dépendances et niveaux de représentations en syntaxe,” Thèse de doctorat d'Etat, Université Paris VII.
1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Webelhuth, G. 1995a. “X-bar theory and case theory,” in Webelhuth (1995b), 15–95.
(ed.). 1995b. Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wilder, C. and H.-M. Gärtner. 1997. Introduction. In Wilder, Gärtner, and Bierwisch (1997), 1–35.
, , and (eds.). 1997. The Role of Economy Principles in Linguistic Theory, Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Williams, E.1995. “Theta theory,” in Webelhuth (1995b), 97–124.
1994. PRO-Legomena: Distribution and Reference of Infinitival Subjects, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zagona, K. 1982. “Government and proper government of verbal projections,” PhD thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Zocca, C. 2003. “O que não está lá? Um estudo sobre morfologia flexional em elipses,” MA thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Zwart, C. J.-W. 1992. “Dutch expletives and small clause predicate raising,” in (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 22, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA Publications, 477–91.Google Scholar
Zwart, C. J.-W.1993. “Dutch syntax: A minimalist approach,” PhD thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
1997. Morphosyntax of Verb Movement: A Minimalist Approach to the Syntax of Dutch, Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abels, K. 2003. “Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Abney, S. R. 1987. “The noun phrase in its sentential aspect,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1995. Deutsche Syntax im Sprachenvergleich: Grundlegung einer typologischen Syntax des Deutschen, Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
and . 2001. Proto-Properties and Grammatical Encoding: A Correspondence Theory of Argument Selection, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Adger, D. 1994. “Functional heads and interpretation,” PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.
and . 2005. “Merge and move: Wh-dependencies revisited,” Linguistic Inquiry 36, 161–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2004. “Gapping, pseudogapping and sideward movement,” Studia Linguistica 58, 185–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albizu, P. 1997. “The syntax of person agreement,” PhD thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Albizu, P.1998. “Generalized person-case constraint: A case for a syntax-driven inflectional morphology”, in A. Mendikoetxea and M. Uribe-Etxebarria (eds.), Theoretical Issues on the Morphology-Syntax Interface, San Sebastian: Supplements of the Anuario del Seminario Julio de Urquijo, 1–34.
1997. Adverb Placement: A Case Study in Antisymmetric Syntax, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoun, J. 1979. “On government, case marking, and clitic placement,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Aoun, J.1982. “On the logical nature of the binding principles: Quantifier lowering, double raising of there and the notion empty element,” in and (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 12, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA Publications, 16–35.Google Scholar
, , and . 1994. “Agreement, word order, and conjunction in some varieties of Arabic,” Linguistic Inquiry 25, 195–220.Google Scholar
and . 1985. “On non-overt operators,” Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 10, 17–36.Google Scholar
Aoun, J. and J. Nunes. 1997. “Vehicle change and Move-F,” paper presented at the Colloque de syntaxe et sémantique à Paris, Université de Paris 7, October 16–18, 1997. [To appear as “Vehicle change phenomena as an argument for Move-F,” Linguistic Inquiry.]
Arnold, M. D. 1995. “Case, periphrastic do, and the loss of verb movement in English,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Authier, J.-M. 1988. “The syntax of unselective binding,” PhD thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
1991. “V-governed expletives, case theory, and the projection principle,” Linguistic Inquiry 22, 721–42.Google Scholar
1962. “The order of elements in a transformational grammar of German,” Language 38, 263–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1978. Introduction to Generative-Transformational Syntax, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function changing, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C.1997. “Thematic roles and grammatical categories,” in (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 73–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001. The Atoms of Language: The Mind's Hidden Rules of Grammar, New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
2003. Lexical Categories: Verbs, Nouns, and Adjectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.). 2001. The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barss, A. 1986. “Chains and anaphoric dependencies,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Bashir, E. 1987. “Agreement in Kashmiri infinitive complements,” in , , and (eds.), Select Papers from SALA-7, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 13–27.Google Scholar
Bastos, A. 2001. “Fazer, eu faço! Topicalização de constituintes verbais en português brasileiro,” MA thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Bayer, J. 1987. “The syntax of scalar predicates and so-called ‘floating quantifiers’,” ms., Max-Plank-Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen.
1990. Generalized Verb Movement: Aspects of Verb Syntax, Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2004. Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. III, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1988. “Psych-verbs and θ-theory,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6, 291–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergvall, V. L. 1987. “The position and properties of in situ and right-moved questions in Kikuyu,” in (ed.), Current Approaches to African Linguistics, Vol. IV, Dordrecht: Foris, 37–51.Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. 2001. “The DP hypothesis: Identifying clausal properties in the nominal domain,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 536–61.
den Besten, H. 1977. “On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive verbs,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge and Universiteit van Amsterdam. [Appeared in den Besten (1989).]
den Besten, H.1985. “The ergative hypothesis and free word order in Dutch and German,” in (ed.), Studies in German Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris, 23–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
den Besten, H.1989. “Studies in West Germanic syntax,” PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Tilburg.
1995a. “In terms of merge: Copy and head movement,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27, 41–64.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, J. D.1995b. “Morphosyntax: The syntax of verbal inflection,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
2002. “A-chains at the PF-interface: Copies and ‘covert’ movement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20, 197–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, J. D.2003. “Floating quantifiers: Handle with care,” in and (eds.), The Second Glot International State-of-the-Art Book, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 107–48.Google Scholar
and . 1997. “Inter-arboreal operations: Head-movement and the extension requirement,” Linguistic Inquiry 28, 345–56.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, J. D. and S. Wurmbrand. 2003. “Relativizing phases,” ms., McGill University, Montreal/University of Connecticut, Storrs. [To appear as “Domains of Agreement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory.]
Boeckx, C. 2000. “EPP eliminated,” ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Boeckx, C.2002. “On labels in syntax,” ms., University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Boeckx, C.2004. “Bare syntax,” ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Boeckx, C. and K. K. Grohmann. 2003. “Introduction,” in and (eds.), Multiple Wh-Fronting, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C. and K. K. Grohmann2004. “Putting phases into perspective,” ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and University of Cyprus, Nicosia. [To appear in Syntax.]
and . 2003. “Reply to ‘Control is not movement’,” Linguistic Inquiry 34, 269–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C., N. Hornstein, and J. Nunes. 2004. “Overt copies in reflexive and control structures: A movement analysis,” ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, University of Maryland, College Park, and Universidade de São Paulo.
Bonet, E. 1991. “Morphology after syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1994. “D-structure, theta criterion, and movement into theta positions,” Linguistic Analysis 24, 247–86.Google Scholar
1997. The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation: An Economy Approach, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bošković, Ž.1998. “LF movement and the minimalist program”, in and (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 28, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA Publications, 43–57.Google Scholar
2001. On the Nature of the Syntax-Phonology Interface: Cliticization and Related Phenomena. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Bošković, Ž.2003. “On left branch extraction,” in , , , , and (eds.), Investigations into Formal Slavic Linguistics: Contributions of the Fourth European Conference on Formal Description of Slavic Languages – FDSL IV, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 543–77.Google Scholar
2004. “Be careful where you float your quantifiers,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž. and J. Nunes. 2004. “The copy theory of movement: A view from PF,” ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs and Universidade de São Paulo.
Bowers, J. S. 1973. “Grammatical relations,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 1981 as The Theory of Grammatical Relations, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.]
1982. “The head-selector theory of lexical specifications and the nonexistence of coarse categories,” Linguistic Analysis 10, 321–25.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. 1972. “On sentence stress and syntactic transformations,” in (ed.), Contributions to Generative Phonology, Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 73–107.Google Scholar
Browning, M. A. 1987. “Null operator constructions,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Bruening, B. 2001. Syntax at the edge: Cross-clausal phenomena and the Syntax of Passamaquoddy. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
and . 2004. The Syntax and Semantics of Split Constructions: A Comparative Study, Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cann, R. 1999. “Specifiers as secondary heads,” in , , , and (eds.), Specifiers: Minimalist Approaches, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21–45.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. and M. Starke. 1999. “The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns,” in van Riemsdijk (1999), 145–233.
Carston, R. 1996. “The architecture of the mind: Modularity and modularization,” in (ed.), Cognitive Science: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell, 53–83.Google Scholar
, , and . 1999. “Merge over move and the extended projection principle,” University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 8, 63–103.Google Scholar
Chametzky, R. A.2003. “Phrase structure,” in (ed.), Minimalist Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell, 192–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, L. 1997. “Wh-in situ phenomena in French,” MA thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Cheng, L. L.-S. 1991. “On the typology of wh-questions,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 1997, New York, NY: Garland.]
Chomsky, N. 1955. “The logical structure of linguistic theory,” ms., Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Revised 1956 manuscript published in part as The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory by New York, NY: Plenum, 1975; Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1985.]
Chomsky, N.1970. “Remarks on nominalizations,” in and (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company, 184–221.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1973. “Conditions on transformations,” in and (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 232–86.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1977. “On wh-movement,” in , , and (eds.), Formal Syntax, New York, NY: Academic Press, 71–132.Google Scholar
1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1991. “Some notes on economy of derivation and representation,” in (ed), Principles and Parameters in Generative Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 417–54. [Reprinted in Chomsky (1995), 129–66.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1993. “A minimalist program for linguistic theory,” in and (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52. [Reprinted in Chomsky (1995), 167–217.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.1999. “Derivation by phase,” MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18. [Revised version appeared as Chomsky 2001.]
Chomsky, N.2000. “Minimalist inquiries: The framework,” in , , and (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89–155.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.2001. “Derivation by phase,” in (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.2004. “Beyond explanatory adequacy,” in Belletti (2004), 104–31.
Chomsky, N.2005b. “On phases,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [To appear in et al. (eds.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. and H. Lasnik.1993. “The theory of principles and parameters,” in , , , and (eds.), Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 506–69. [Reprinted in Chomsky (1995), 13–127.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. The Design of Agreement: Evidence from Chamorro, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 1984. “A′-bound pro vs. variable,” ms., Università di Venezia.
1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2002. The Structure of IP and DP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. I, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2005. “On the nature of merge: external merge, internal merge, and parallel merge,” Linguistic Inquiry 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1993. “A computational model of language learnability and language change,” Linguistic Inquiry 24, 299–345.Google Scholar
Collins, C.2002. “Eliminating labels,” in and (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell, 42–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1996. “VP-internal structure and object shift in Icelandic,” Linguistic Inquiry 27, 391–444.Google Scholar
1987. “Small clauses in Spanish and English,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 5, 225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. “On null operator structures,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 11, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1996. Chomsky's Universal Grammar: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell, second edition.Google Scholar
Corver, N. 1990. “The syntax of left branch extractions,” PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Tilburg.
and . 1999. An Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Language Acquisition, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
and . 2001. “Nature, nurture and Universal Grammar,” Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 139–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1998. Investigations in Universal Grammar: A Guide to Experiments on the Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1977. Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern-Day “Wild Child”, New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Davis, H. 2001. “Is there a pronominal argument parameter?,” paper presented at the Workshop on the Role of Agreement in Argument Structure, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics/OTS, Universiteit Utrecht, August 31–September 1, 2001.
deGraff, M. 1999a. “Creolization, language change, and language acquisition: A prolegomenon,” in de Graff (1999b), 1–46.
(ed.). 1999b. Language Creation and Language Change: Creolization, Diachrony, and Development, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
DeLancey, S. 1997. “What an innatist argument should look like,” in , , and (eds.), SKY 1997 (Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland), Helsinki: Linguistic Association of Finland, 7–24.Google Scholar
1995a. Particles: On the Syntax of Verb-Particle, Triadic and Causative Constructions, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 2002. “From hell to polarity: ‘Aggressively non-D-linked’ wh-phrases as polarity items,” Linguistic Inquiry 33, 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
den Dikken, M. and R. Sybesma. 1998. “Take serials light up the middle,” ms. CUNY Graduate Center, New York and Universiteit Leiden.
1991. “Thematic proto-roles, argument selection, and lexical semantic defaults,” Language 67, 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. “Charting the learning path: Cues to parameter setting,” Linguistic Inquiry 29, 27–67.Google Scholar
Eliseu, A. 1984. “Trabalho de síntese para provas de aptidão pedagógica e capacidade científica,” ms., Universidade de Lisboa.
1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure-Preserving, and Local Transformations, New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Emonds, J. E. and R. Ostler. 2005. “Double object constructions,” in and (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1999. “Un-principled syntax: The derivation of syntactic relations,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 317–45.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1998. A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. D. and T. D. Seely. 2002. “Rule applications as cycles in a level-free syntax,” in and (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell, 65–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabb, N. 1984. “Syntactic affixation,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Fanselow, G. 1992. “ ‘Ergative’ Verben und die Struktur des deutschen Mittelfelds,” in (ed.), Deutsche Syntax: Ansichten und Aussichten, Berlin: de Gruyter, 276–303.Google Scholar
Fassi Fehri, A. 1980. “Some complement phenomena in Arabic, lexical grammar, the complementizer phrase hypothesis and the non-accessibility condition,” ms., University of Rabat.
and . 2001. “Expletives as arguments: Germanic existential sentences revisited,” Linguistische Berichte 187, 289–324.Google Scholar
2000. “Uma observação sobre a lugar da teoria da ligação e do critério temático dentro do programa minimalista,” DELTA 16.1, 139–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. D. 2001. “Setting syntactic parameters,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 730–67.
1999. “Reconstruction, binding theory, and the interpretation of chains,” Linguistic Inquiry 30, 157–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1999. “Cyclic computation, a computationally efficient minimalist syntax,” Syntax 2, 1–27.CrossRef
2002. Phrase Structure Composition and Syntactic Dependencies, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Freidin, R.1986. “Fundamental issues in the theory of binding,” in (ed.), Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, Dordrecht: Reidel, 151–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 1991. Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Freidin, R.1999. “Cyclicity and minimalism,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 95–126.Google Scholar
Fukui, N. 1986. “A theory of category projection and its applications,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1988. “Deriving the differences between English and Japanese: A case study in parametric syntax,” English Linguistics 5, 249–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002. General Red Transformations and Beyond: Reflections on Minimalist Syntax, Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
1981. “Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure,” Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155–84.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1982. “Coordination and transformational grammar,” Linguistic Inquiry 13, 663–77.Google Scholar
1991. Syntactic Variables: Resumptive Pronouns and A′-Binding in Palauan, Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1989. “Floating quantifiers, scrambling, and configurationality,” Linguistic Inquiry 20, 633–41.Google Scholar
1995. “Syntax outranks phonology: Evidence from Ancient Greek,” Phonology 12, 343–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002. African American English: A Linguistic Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. “Syntactic inquiries into discourse restrictions on multiple interrogatives,” Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 42, 1–60.Google Scholar
2000a. “Towards a syntactic understanding of prosodically reduced pronouns,” Theoretical Linguistics 25, 149–84.Google Scholar
Grohmann, K. K.2000b. “Prolific peripheries: A radical view from the left,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Grohmann, K. K.2003a. “German is a multiple wh-fronting language!” in and (eds.), Multiple Wh-Fronting, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 99–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003b. Prolific Domains: On the Anti-Locality of Movement Dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003c. “Successive cyclicity under (anti-)local considerations,” Syntax 6, 260–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grohmann, K. K.2004. “Natural relations,” ms., University of Cyprus, Nicosia.
Grohmann, K. K., J. Drury, and J. C. Castillo. 2000. “No more EPP,” in and (eds.), WCCFL 19: Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 153–66.Google Scholar
2003. “A unified theory of ‘standard’ and ‘transparent’ free relatives,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21, 247–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haïk, I. 1985. “The syntax of operators,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Hale, K. and S. J. Keyser. 1993. “On argument structure and the lexical expression of grammatical relations,” in and (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 53–110.Google Scholar
Halle, M. and A. Marantz. 1993. “Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection,” in and (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 111–76.Google Scholar
Harbert, W. 1995. “Binding theory, control, and pro,” in Webelhuth (1995b), 177–240.
1995. Belfast English and Standard English: Dialect Variation and Parameter Setting, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hicks, G. 2003. “ ‘So easy to look at, so hard to define’: Tough movement in the minimalist framework,” MA thesis, University of York.
and . 1981. “Questions, quantifiers, and crossing,” The Linguistic Review 1, 41–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiraiwa, K. 2003. “Cyclic locality”, ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1988. Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. 1: Theory and Structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2000. An Introduction to Pidgins and Creoles, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, A. 1986. “Word order and syntactic features in the Scandinavian languages and English,” PhD thesis, Stockholms Universitet.
2000. “Scandinavian stylistic fronting: how any category can become an expletive,” Linguistic Inquiry 31, 445–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, A.2005. “Stylistic Fronting,” in and (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
and . 1995. The Role of Inflection in Scandinavian Syntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holmer, A. 2002. “The Iberian-Caucasian connection in a typological perspective,” ms., Lunds Universitet.
Hornstein, N.2000. “Existentials, A-chains, and reconstruction,” in DELTA16 special, 45–79.
Hornstein, N.2003. “On control”, in (ed.), Minimalist Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell, 6–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2004. “PRO gate and movement,” Proceedings of the 25th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 8.1, 33–46.Google Scholar
Hornstein, N. and D. W. Lightfoot. 1981. “Introduction,” in and (eds.), Explanation in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, London: Longman, 9–31.Google Scholar
and . 2002. “On asymmetries between parasitic gap and across-the-board constructions,” Syntax 5, 26–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. 1982. “Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1993. “Reconstruction and the structure of VP: Some theoretical consequences,” Linguistic Inquiry 24, 103–38.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 1990. The Phonology-Syntax Connection, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Inkelas, S. and D. Zec1995. “Syntax-phonology interface,” in (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory, Oxford: Blackwell, 535–49.Google Scholar
1990. “On Larson's account of the double object construction,” Linguistic Inquiry 21, 427–54.Google Scholar
Janda, R. D. 1980. “On certain constructions of English's,” in , , , , , , , and (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, CA: BLS, 324–36.Google Scholar
2000. Biolinguistics: Exploring the Biology of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1997. “A critique of the minimalist program,” Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 273–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. F. 1985. “Syntax and thematics of infinitival adjuncts,” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
1991. “Stylistic fronting in Icelandic,” Scandinavian Working Papers in Linguistics 48, 1–43.Google Scholar
1999. “Strong pronouns, weak pronominals and the null subject parameter,” Probus 11, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kato, M. 2004. “Two types of wh-in-situ in Brazilian Portuguese,” paper presented at the Georgetown University Round Table: Comparative and Cross-Linguistic Research in Syntax, Semantics, and Computational Linguistics (GURT 2004), March 26–29, 2004.
Kato, M. and J. Nunes. 1998. “Two sources for relative clause formation in Brazilian Portuguese,” paper presented at the Eighth Colloquium on Generative Grammar, Universidade de Lisboa, April 19–22, 1998.
Kayne, R. S.1976. “French relative que,” in and (eds.), Current Studies in Romance Linguistics, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 255–99.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. S.1985. “L'accord du participe passé en francais et en italien,” Modèles Linguistiques 7, 73–89. [English version published as “Past participle agreement in French and Italian,” in Kayne (2000), 10–24.]
Kayne, R. S.,1989. “Facets of Romance past participle agreement,” in (ed.), Dialect Variation and the Theory of Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris, 85–104. [Reprinted in Kayne (2000), 25–39.]Google Scholar
1991. “Romance clitics, verb movement, and PRO,” Linguistic Inquiry 22, 647–86. [Reprinted in Kayne (2000), 60–97.]Google Scholar
Kiguchi, H. 2002. “Syntax unchained,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Kitagawa, Y. 1986. “Subjects in Japanese and English,” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
1993. “Object agreement phrases and the split VP hypothesis,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 99–148.Google Scholar
1984. The Syntax of Verbs: From Verb Movement in the Kru Languages to Universal Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1996. “Severing the external argument from its verb,” in and (eds.), Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 109–38.Google Scholar
Kural, M. and G. Tsoulas. 2005. “Indices and the theory of grammar,” ms., University of California, Irvine and University of York.
1988. “Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese,” Lingvisticae Investigationes 12, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W., P. Cohen, C. Robins, and J. Lewis. 1968. “A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Puerto Rican Speakers in New York City,” Cooperative Research Report 3288, Vols. I and II, Philadelphia, PA: US Regional Survey (Linguistics Laboratory, University of Pennsylvania).
1998. Comparative Studies in Word Order Variation: Adverbs, Pronouns and Clause Structure in Romance and Germanic, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. “Unergatives that assign ergative, unaccusatives that assign accusative,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 149–72.Google Scholar
Landau, I. 1999. “Elements of control,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 2001 as Elements of Control: Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Constructions, Dordrecht: Kluwer.]
1990. “Double objects revisited: Reply to Jackendoff,” Linguistic Inquiry 21, 589–632.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. 1981. “Restricting the theory of transformations: A case study,” in and (eds.), Explanations in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, London: Longman, 152–73. [Reprinted in Lasnik, H. 1990. Essays on Restrictiveness and Learnability, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 125–45.]Google Scholar
1992a. “Case and expletives: Notes toward a parametric account,” Linguistic Inquiry 23, 381–405.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.1992b. “Two notes on control and binding,” in , , , and (eds.), Control and Grammar, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 235–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, H.1995a. “Verbal morphology: Syntactic Structures meets the minimalist program,” in and (eds.), Evolution and Revolution in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Carlos Otero, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 251–75. [Reprinted in Lasnik (1999), 97–119.]Google Scholar
1995b. “A note on pseudogapping,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27, 143–63. [Reprinted in Lasnik (1999), 151–74.]Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.1995c. “Last resort and Attract F,” in , , and (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 62–81.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.1995d. “Last resort,” in S. Haraguchi and M. Funaki (eds.), Minimalism and Linguistic Theory, Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo Publishing, 1–32.
1998. “Some reconstruction riddles,” Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 5.1, 83–98.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H.2001a. “Derivation vs. representation in modern transformational syntax,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 197–217.
with and . 2000. Syntactic Structures Revisited: Contemporary Lectures on Classic Transformational Theory, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. and M. Saito1991. “On the subject of infinitives,” in , , and (eds.), Papers from the 27th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 1991. Part 1: The General Session, Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society, 324–43.Google Scholar
and 1992. Move α: Conditions on Its Applications and Outputs, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
and . 1988. A Course in GB Syntax: Lectures on Binding and Empty Categories, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
and with . 2005. A Course in Minimalist Syntax: Foundations and Prospects, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1983. “A distributional difference between reciprocals and reflexives,” Linguistic Inquiry 14, 723–30.Google Scholar
Lebeaux, D.1988. “Language acquisition and the form of the grammar.” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [Published 2000 as Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.]
Lebeaux, D.1991. “Relative clauses, licensing, and the nature of the derivation,” in (ed.), Perspective on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 209–39.Google Scholar
1995. “Where does the binding theory apply?,” University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 3, 63–88.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, C. 1991. “Take serial verb constructions in Fon,” in (ed.), Serial Verbs: Grammatical, Comparative and Cognitive Approaches, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 37–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003. “Some interface properties of the phase,” Linguistic Inquiry 34, 506–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1995. Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levin, N. S. 1978. “Some identity-of-sense deletions puzzle me. Do they you?” in , , and (eds.), Papers from the Fourteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society, 229–40.Google Scholar
Levin, N. S.1979. “Main verb ellipsis in spoken English,” PhD thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus. [Published 1986 as Main Verb Ellipsis in Spoken English, New York, NY: Garland.]
1984. “A note on right node raising, tough constructions and reanalysis rules,” Linguistic Analysis 13, 159–72.Google Scholar
Lidz, J. 2003. “Causation and reflexivity in Kannada,” in and (eds.), Clause Structure in South Asian Languages, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 93–130.Google Scholar
1991. How to Set Parameters: Arguments from Language Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1999. The Development of Language: Acquisition, Change and Evolution, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lin, T.-H. 2001. “Light verb syntax and the theory of phrase structure,” PhD thesis, University of California, Irvine.
1935. The Burushaski Language, Vol. I: Introduction and Grammar. Oslo: Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning.Google Scholar
1968. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992. Locality: A Theory and Some of Its Empirical Consequences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
and . 2000. “A minimalist approach to A-movement and control,” Lingua 110, 409–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1987. “Parameters, binding theory, and learnability,” Linguistic Inquiry 18, 413–44.Google Scholar
Marácz, L. 1989. “Asymmetries in Hungarian,” PhD thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
1997. “No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon,” Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2, 201–25.Google Scholar
Martin, R. 1996. “A minimalist theory of PRO,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Martin, R. and J. Uriagereka. 1999. “Lectures on dynamic syntax,” lecture series given at the LSA Summer Institute, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, June 21–July 30, 1999.
Mathieu, E. 2002. “The syntax of non-canonical quantification: A comparative study,” PhD thesis, University College London.
Matushansky, O. 2003. “Going through a phase,” ms., CNRS/Université de Paris 8.
McCawley, J. 1981. “An un-syntax,” in and (eds.), Current Approaches to Syntax, New York, NY: Academic Press, 167–93.Google Scholar
McCloskey, J. 1990. “Resumptive pronouns, A-bar binding, and levels of representation in Irish,” in (ed.), The Syntax of the Modern Celtic Languages, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 199–256.Google Scholar
McCloskey, J.1997. “Subjecthood and subject positions,” in (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 197–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, J.2001. “On the distribution of subject properties in Irish,” in and (eds.), Objects and Other Subjects: Grammatical Functions, Functional Categories and Configurationality, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 157–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, J.2002. “Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of operations,” in and (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell, 184–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, D. 1986. “Conditions on wh-chains,” PhD thesis, CUNY Graduate Center, New York.
1989. “Partial and multiple wh-movement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 7, 565–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J. 1995. “Parameters in acquisition,” in and (eds.), The Handbook of Child Language, Oxford: Blackwell, 10–35.Google Scholar
Merchant, J. 1996. “Object scrambling and quantifier float in German,” in (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 26, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA, 179–93.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. and N. Chomsky. 1963. “Finitary models of language users,” in , , and (eds.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. II, New York, NY: Wiley, 419–91.Google Scholar
1994. “A s interrogativas no português brasileiro e o critério-wh,” Letras de Hoje 96, 19–33.Google Scholar
2000. The Light Verb Construction in Japanese: The Role of the Verbal Noun, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohammad, M. 1990. “The sentence structure of Arabic,” PhD thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Moro, A. 1989. “There/Cias raised predicates,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Müller, G. 2003. “Optionality in optimality-theoretic syntax,” in and (eds.), The Second Glot International State-of-the-Art Book, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 289–321.Google Scholar
2004. “Verb second as vP-first,” The Journal of Comparative Germanic Syntax 7, 179–234.Google Scholar
Munn, A. 1993. “Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Nasu, N. 2002. “Aspects of the syntax of A-movement: A study of English infinitival constructions and related phenomena,” PhD thesis, University of Essex, Colchester.
Neeleman, A. 1994. “Complex predicates,” PhD thesis, Universiteit Utrecht.
Neidle, C., J. Kegl, B. Bahan, D. Aarons, and D. MacLaughlin. 1997. “Rightward wh–movement in American Sign Language,” in , , and (eds.), Rightward Movement, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 247–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nissenbaum, J. 2000. “Investigations of covert phrase movement,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Nunes, J. 1995. “The copy theory of movement and linearization of chains in the minimalist program,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
1998. “Bare X′-theory and structures formed by movement,” Linguistic Inquiry 29, 160–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, J.1999. “Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 217–49.Google Scholar
Nunes, J. and E. Thompson. 1998. “Appendix,” in Uriagereka (1998), 497–521.
and . 2005. “Morphological identity in ellipsis,” Leiden Papers in Linguistics 2.2, 29–42.Google Scholar
Obenauer, H.-G.1994. “Aspects de la syntaxe A-barre: Effets d'intervention et mouvement des quantifieurs,” Thèse de doctorat d'Etat, Université de Paris VIII.
Oishi, M. 1990. “Conceptual problems of upward X-bar theory,” ms., Tohoku Gakuin University.
1997. “Procrastinate to feature strength,” Interdisciplinary Information Sciences 3, 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003. “When linearity meets bare phrase structure,” Current Issues in Linguistics: Special Publications of the English Linguistics Society of Japan, 2, 18–41.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J. 1995. “The syntax of complementation: On the relation between syntactic structure and selection,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
and . 1998. “On the syntactic nature of the me-lui and the person-case constraint,” Anuario del Seminario Julio de Urquijo XXXII–2, 415–33.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J., J. Uriagereka, and M. Uribe-Etxebarria. 1994. “Word order and wh-movement: Towards a parametric account,” paper presented at the 17th GLOW Colloquium, Vienna, April 6–8, 1994.
Ouhalla, J. 1994. “Verb movement and word order in Arabic,” in and (eds.), Verb Movement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1971. Deep and Surface Constraints in Generative Grammar, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D.1978. “Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis,” in , , and (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, CA: University of California, BLS, 157–89.Google Scholar
and . 1979. Syntactic Argumentation and the Structure of English, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. 1987. “Wh-in situ: Movement and unselective binding,” in and (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 98–129.Google Scholar
and . 1997. “Wh-movement and the position of Spec-CP: Evidence from American Sign Language,” Language 73, 18–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pires, A. 2001. “The syntax of gerunds and infinitives: Subjects, case and control,” PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
and . 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. 1966. “On the so-called ‘pronouns’ in English,” Monograph Series in Language and Linguistics19, 177–206. [Reprinted in D. A. Reibel and S. A. Schane (eds.). 1969. Modern Studies in English, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 201–24 and in R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.). 1970. Readings in Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company, 56–82.]
1974. On Raising: One Rule of English Grammar and Its Theoretical Implications, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1981. Transformational Syntax: A Student's Guide to Chomsky's Extended Standard Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1988. Transformational Grammar: A First Course, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. 1976. “The syntactic domain of anaphora,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Richards, M. D. 2004. “Object Shift and Scrambling in North and West Germanic: A case study in symmetrical Syntax,” PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
2001. Movement in Language: Interactions and Architectures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Richards, N.2002. “A distinctness condition on linearization,” ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1978. A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: The Binding Nature of Prepositional Phrases, Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. 1991. “Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew,” in (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 37–62.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. 1980. “Negation, wh-movement and the pro-drop parameter,” paper presented at the 3rd GLOW Colloquium, Max-Planck Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen, April 10–13, 1980. [Published as “Negation, wh-movement and the null-subject parameter” in Rizzi (1982), 117–84.]
Rizzi, L.1997. “The fine structure of the left periphery,” in (ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 281–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L.2001. ‘Relativized minimality effects’, in Baltin and Collins (2001), 89–110.
(ed.). 2004. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. II, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1985. “Agreement parameters and the development of English modal auxiliaries,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3, 21–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French, Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
1998. “Have/Be raising, Move F, and procrastinate,” Linguistic Inquiry 29, 113–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. G.2001. “Head movement,” in Baltin and Collins (2001), 113–47.
1967. The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. S.1970. “A principle governing deletion in English sentential complementation,” in and (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company, 20–29.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. 1967. “Constraints on variables in syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [Published 1986 as Infinite Syntax!, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.]
Rothstein, S. D. 1995. “Small clauses and copular constructions,” in and (eds.), Small Clauses, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 27–48.Google Scholar
Rubin, E. 2002. “The structure of modifiers,” ms., University of Utah, Salt Lake City. [To appear with Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]
1988a. “On multiple questions and multiple wh-fronting,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6, 445–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudin, C.1988b. “Finiteness and opacity: Evidence from the Balkans,” in , , and (eds.), Studies in Syntactic Typology, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runner, J. 1995. “Noun phrase licensing and interpretation,” PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [Published 1998 as Noun Phrase Licensing, New York, NY: Garland.]
Runner, J.2005. “The accusative plus infinitive construction in English,” in and (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1996. Restrukturierung und Lokalität: Universelle Beschränkungen für Wortstellungsvarianten, Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Sabel, J.1998. “Principles and parameters of wh-movement,” Habilitationsschrift, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.
Sabel, J.2000. “Expletives as features,” in and (eds.), WCCFL 19: Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 411–24.Google Scholar
1991. “Wh-scope mechanisms in Bahasa Indonesia,” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 15, 183–218.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1985. “Coordination and how to distinguish categories,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3, 117–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salo, P. 2003. “Causatives and the empty lexicon: A minimalist perspective,” PhD thesis, University of Helsinki.
Schachter, P. 1976. “The subject in Philippine languages: Topic, actor, actor-topic, or none of the above?,” in (ed.), Subject and Topic, New York, NY: Academic Press, 493–518.Google Scholar
Schachter, P.1977. “Reference-related and role-related properties of subjects,” in and (eds.), Grammatical Relations, New York, NY: Academic Press, 279–306.Google Scholar
1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
, , and . 1996. “An optimality-theoretic approach to variation in negative inversion in AAVE,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 14, 591–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000. Wh-Movement and the Theory of Feature-Checking. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1995. The Mind of a Savant: Language-Learning and Modularity, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Speas, M. 1986. “Adjunctions and projections in syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Speas, M.1991. “Generalized transformations and the S-structure position of adjuncts,” in (ed.), Perspective on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 241–57.Google Scholar
1988. “A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure,” Linguistic Inquiry 19, 425–49.Google Scholar
Starke, M. 2001. “Move dissolves into merge: A theory of locality,” PhD thesis, Université de Genève.
Stowell, T. 1981. “Origins of phrase structure,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Stowell, T.1984. “Null operators and the theory of proper government,” ms., University of California, Los Angeles.
Sultan, U. 2002. “On a few case and agreement puzzles in Standard Arabic,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Svenonius, P.2001. “Locality, phases, and the cycle,” ms., Universitetet i Tromsø.
Svenonius, P.2004. “On the edge”, in , , and (eds.), Peripheries, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 259–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1983. “The possessor that ran away from home,” The Linguistic Review 3, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, D. 1994. “Minimality of movement,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Taraldsen, K. T. 1981. “On the theoretical interpretation of a class of ‘marked’ extractions,” in , , and (eds.), The Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar, Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore, 475–516.Google Scholar
Thiersch, C. 1978. “Topics in German syntax,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Travis, L. deMena. 1984. “Parameters and effects of word order variation,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Truckenbrodt, H. 1995. “Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence,” PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
1999. “On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases,” Linguistic Inquiry 30, 219–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992. “Postverbal focus constructions in Chadic,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 10, 303–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ura, H. 1994. “Varieties of raising and the feature-based theory of movement,” MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics7.
Uriagereka, J. 1988. “On government,” PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
1997. “Multiple spell-out,” Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 40, 109–35.Google Scholar
1998. Rhyme and Reason: An Introduction to Minimalist Syntax, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J.1999a. “Comments on ‘Minimalist inquiries: The framework’,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Uriagereka, J.1999c. “Multiple spell-out,” in and (eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 251–82.Google Scholar
1999d. “Minimal restrictions on Basque movement,” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17, 403–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, J.2000b. “Comments on ‘Derivation by Phase’,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Uriagereka, J.2001. “Pure adjuncts,” ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
Uribe-Etxebarria, M. 1989. “Some notes on the structure of IP in Basque,” ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
1986. “An empty category as the subject of tensed S in English,” Linguistic Inquiry 17, 581–86.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J.-R. 1982. “Dépendances et niveaux de représentations en syntaxe,” Thèse de doctorat d'Etat, Université Paris VII.
1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Webelhuth, G. 1995a. “X-bar theory and case theory,” in Webelhuth (1995b), 15–95.
(ed.). 1995b. Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wilder, C. and H.-M. Gärtner. 1997. Introduction. In Wilder, Gärtner, and Bierwisch (1997), 1–35.
, , and (eds.). 1997. The Role of Economy Principles in Linguistic Theory, Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Williams, E.1995. “Theta theory,” in Webelhuth (1995b), 97–124.
1994. PRO-Legomena: Distribution and Reference of Infinitival Subjects, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zagona, K. 1982. “Government and proper government of verbal projections,” PhD thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Zocca, C. 2003. “O que não está lá? Um estudo sobre morfologia flexional em elipses,” MA thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Zwart, C. J.-W. 1992. “Dutch expletives and small clause predicate raising,” in (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 22, Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, GLSA Publications, 477–91.Google Scholar
Zwart, C. J.-W.1993. “Dutch syntax: A minimalist approach,” PhD thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
1997. Morphosyntax of Verb Movement: A Minimalist Approach to the Syntax of Dutch, Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar