Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:22:05.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Michael K. Brame, Base Generated Syntax. Seattle: Noit Amrofer, 1978. Pp. 127. Essays toward Realistic Syntax. Seattle: Noit Amrofer, 1979. Pp. 213.

Review products

Michael K. Brame, Base Generated Syntax. Seattle: Noit Amrofer, 1978. Pp. 127. Essays toward Realistic Syntax. Seattle: Noit Amrofer, 1979. Pp. 213.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Gerald Gazdar
Gerald Gazdar
Affiliation:
Cognitive Studies Programme, University of Sussex
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 18 , Issue 2 , September 1982 , pp. 464 - 473
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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

Bach, E. (1977). Comments on the paper by Chomsky. In Culicover, P. W., Wasow, T. & Akmajian, A. (eds) Formal syntax. New York: Academic Press. 133–155.Google Scholar
Berman, A. & Szamosi, M. (1972). Observations on sentential stress. Lg 48. 304–325.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1975). On the abstractness of syntactic structure: the VP controversy. LAn I. 191–203.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1976). Conjectures and refutations in syntax and semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1977). Alternatives to the Tensed S and Specified Subject Conditions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1. 191–203.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1978a). Discourse and binding without transformations. LAn 4. 365–404.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1978b). The Base Hypothesis and the Spelling Prohibition. LAn 4. 1–30.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1979). A note on COMP S grammar vs. sentence grammar. LAn 5, 383–386.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1980a). hope, LAn 6. 247–259.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1980 b). Lexicon vs. filters. In Hoekstra, T., Huist, H. v. d. & Moortgat, M. (eds) Lexical grammar. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 73–95.Google Scholar
Brame, M. K. (1981). Trace Theory with filters vs. lexically based syntax without. LIn 12. 275–293.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. (1971). Sentence stress and syntactic transformations. Lg 47. 257–281.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations. Reprinted in Essays on form and interpretation. New York: North-Holland. 81–160.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1980a). On binding. Lb II. 1–46.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1980b) Rules and representations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981a) Knowledge of language: its elements and origins. In Longuet-Higgins, C., Lyons, J. & Broadbent, D. (eds) The psychological mechanisms of language. London: British Academy & Royal Society. 9–20.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981b). Discussion. In Longuet-Higgins, C.Lyons, J. & Broadbent, D. (eds) The psychological mechanisms of language. London: British Academy & Royal Society. 63–67.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Lasnik, H. (1977) Filters and control. LIn 8. 425–504.Google Scholar
Fiengo, R. (1977) On trace theory. LIn 8. 35–61.Google Scholar
Gazdar, G. (1981). Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. LIn 12. 155–184.Google Scholar
George, L. (1980). Analogical generalizations of natural language syntax. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. (1980). Unambiguous paths. Paper presented to the 5th GLOW Colloquium, Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, 04 10–13.Google Scholar
Katz, J. J. (1981). Language and other abstract objects. Totowa, N. J.: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. (1976) Avoiding reference to subject. LIn 7. 151–181.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. K. & Postal, P. M.(1979). On an inadequate defence of ‘Trace Theory’. LIn 10. 689–706.Google Scholar
Radford, A. (1981). Transformational syntax. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Rouveret, A. & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1980). Specifying reference to the subject: French causatives and conditions on representations. LIn II. 97–202.Google Scholar
Sadock, J. (1979). Review of Brame (1976). GL 19. 136–148.Google Scholar
Wasow, T. (1978). Review of Brame (1976). LAn 3. 377–395.Google Scholar
Wasow, T. (1980) Comments on the paper by Brame. In Kac, M. (ed.) Current syntactic theories: discussion papers from the 1979 Milwaukee Syntax Conference. Bloomington: IULC.Google Scholar