Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:13:26.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theresa Biberauer, Anders Holmberg, Ian Roberts & Michelle Sheehan, Parametric variation: Null subjects in Minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Pp. vi+368.

Review products

Theresa Biberauer, Anders Holmberg, Ian Roberts & Michelle Sheehan, Parametric variation: Null subjects in Minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Pp. vi+368.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2012

Evi Sifaki
Evi Sifaki*
Affiliation:
University of Roehampton
*
Author's address:Department of Media, Culture and Language, University of Roehampton, Roehampton Lane, London SW15 5SL, UK[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract 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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 217 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

Alexiadou, Artemis & Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1998. Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement and EPP checking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16.3, 491–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Freidin, Robert, Otero, Carlos P. & Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara. 2007. Subjects, topics, and the interpretation of referential pro. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25.4, 691–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2005. Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry 36.4, 533–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2004. The scale of finiteness and the calculus of control. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22.4, 811–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Gereon. 2005. Pro-drop and impoverishment. In Brandt, Patrick & Fuss, Eric (eds.), Form, structure and grammar: A Festschrift presented to Günther Grewendorf on occasion of his 60th birthday, 93–115. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 2004. Against a parameter-setting approach to language variation. In Pica, Pierre (ed.), Linguistic variation yearbook 4, 181–234. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David M. 1971. Deep and surface constraints in syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. On the fine structure of the left periphery. In Haegeman, Liliane (ed.), Elements of grammar, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar