Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T20:37:34.671Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Samuel Schindler Anna Drożdżowicz & Karen Brøcker (eds.), Linguistic intuitions: Evidence and method. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. xiii + 320

Review products

Samuel Schindler Anna Drożdżowicz & Karen Brøcker (eds.), Linguistic intuitions: Evidence and method. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. xiii + 320

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2021

GABE DUPRE*
Affiliation:
Keele University, School of Social, Political, and Global Studies, Chancellor’s Building, Keele, StaffordshireST5 5BG, [email protected]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dupre, Gabe. 2019. Linguistics and the explanatory economy. Synthese 2019, 143.Google Scholar
Guasti, Maria Teresa & Cardinaletti, Anna. 2003. Relative clause formation in Romance child’s production. Probus 15.1, 4789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, Edouard. 2017. Philosophy within its proper bounds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütze, Carson T. 2016. The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology. Berlin: Language Science Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprouse, Jon & Almeida, Diogo. 2012. Assessing the reliability of textbook data in syntax: Adger’s Core syntax. Journal of Linguistics 48.3, 609652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprouse, Jon, Schütze, Carson T. & Almeida, Diogo. 2013. A comparison of informal and formal acceptability judgments using a random sample from Linguistic Inquiry 2001–2010. Lingua 134, 219248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar