Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:27:06.773Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Suppressing the Zs1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Arnold M. Zwicky
Arnold M. Zwicky
Affiliation:
Ohio State University and Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The label CLITIC has been applied to a wide variety of phenomena, from words that are prosodically dependent on neighbouring words (as are unaccented monosyllabic prepositions and personal pronouns in English) to words, or even individual morphemes, with idiosyncratic syntactic distributions (like the second-position pronominal and adverbial particles in many languages). I propose here to reserve the term for elements whose description requires more than the stipulation that they may or must be prosodically dependent.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 133 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Borer, H. (1983). Parametric syntax: case studies in Semitic and Romance languages. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. & Mchombo, S. A. (1985). On topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chichewa. Eastern States Conference on Linguistics 2. 276–312.Google Scholar
Churchward, C. M. (1953). Tongan grammar. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Churchward, C. M. (1959). Tongan dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G. & Sag, I. (1985). Generalized phrase structure grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. (1981). Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaisse, E. M. (1985). Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kanerva, J. (to appear). Morphological integrity and syntax: the evidence from Finnish possessive suffixes. In Iida, M., Wechsler, S. & Zee, D. (eds), Studies in grammatical theory and discourse structure: the interaction of morphology, syntax, and discourse (vol. 1). CSLI Working Papers, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. S. (1975). French syntax: the transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds), The structure of phonological representations, Part I, Dordrecht: Foris. 131–175.Google Scholar
Klavans, J. L. (1979). On clitics as words. Chicago Linguistic Society Parasession 15. 68–80.Google Scholar
Klavans, J. L. (1985). The independence of syntax and phonology in cliticization. Lg 61. 95–120.Google Scholar
Kruisinga, E. (1932). A handbook of present-day English. Part II: English accidence and syntax, vol. 2, 5th ed.Groningen: P. Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, E. A. (1977). On rules of infixing. Bloomington. Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Nevis, J. A. (1984). A non-endoclitic in Estonian. Lingua 64. 209–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevis, J. A. (1985). Finnish particle clitics and general clitic theory. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Poser, W. J. (1985). Cliticization to NP and lexical phonology. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 4. 262–272.Google Scholar
Prista, A. da R. (1966). Essential Portuguese grammar. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Sadock, J. M. (1985). Autolexical syntax: a theory of noun incorporation and similar phenomena. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3. 379–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, P. & Otanes, F. T. (1972). Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stemberger, J. P. (1981). Morphological haplology. Lg 57. 791–817.Google Scholar
Stump, G. T. (1980). An inflectional approach to French clitics. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 24. 1–54.Google Scholar
Williams, E. B. (1976). An introductory Portuguese grammar. New York: Dover. (Republication of 1942 ed.)Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1975) Settling on an underlying form: the English inflectional endings. In Cohen, D. & Wirth, J. R. (eds), Testing linguistic hypotheses. Washington: Hemisphere. 129–185.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1977). On clitics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1984). Welsh soft mutation and the case of object NPs. Chicago Linguistic Society 20. 387–402.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1985a). Clitics and particles. Lg 61. 283–305.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1985b). Rules of allomorphy and syntax–phonology interactions. JL 21. 431–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1986a). The general case: basic form versus default form. To appear in Berkeley Linguistics Society 12.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. (1986b). Incorporating the insights of Autolexical Syntax. Ohio Stale University Working Papers in Linguistics 32. 139–143.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. M. & Pullum, G. K. (1983). Deleting named morphemes. Lingua 59. 155–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar