Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T07:18:24.833Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frederick J. Newmeyer, Linguistic theory in America: The first quarter-century of transformational generative grammar. New York: Academic Press, 1980. Pp. xiii + 290.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

John Fought
John Fought
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104
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
Book Review
Information
Language in Society , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , August 1982 , pp. 317 - 321
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

Bresnan, J. (1976). Evidence for a theory of unbounded transformations. Linguistic Analysis 2. 353–94.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In Jacobs, R. & Rosenbaum, P. (eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn and Co. 184–221. (Reprinted inGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1972), Studies on semantics in generative grammar. The Hague: Mouton. 11–61.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1971). Deep structure, surface structure, and semantic interpretation. In Steinberg, D. & Jakobovits, L. (eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader. Cambridge University Press. 183–216. (Reprinted inGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1972), Studies on semantics in generative grammar. The Hague: Mouton. 62–119.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1972). Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar. In Peters, S. (ed), Goals of linguistic theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 63–130. (Reprinted inGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1972), Studies on semantics in generative grammar. The Hague: Mouton. 120–202.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1977). Essays on form and interpretation. New York: North Holland.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Miller, G. (1963). Introduction to the formal analysis of natural languages. In Luce, R., Bush, R., & Galanter, E. (eds.), Handbook of mathematical psychology, vol. II. New York: Wiley. 269–321.Google Scholar
Dittmar, N. (1976). Sociolinguistics: A critical survey of theory and application. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Harris, Z. (1952a). Discourse analysis. Language 28. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Z. (1952b). Discourse analysis: A sample text. Language 28. 474–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Z. (1957). Co-occurrence and transformation in linguistic structure. Language 33. 283–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Z. (1965). Transformational theory. Language 41. 363–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, C. (1966). The problem of universals in language. In Greenberg, J. (ed.), Universals of language (2nd. ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 1–29.Google Scholar
Hymes, D., & Fought, J. (1981 [1975]). American structuratism (2nd. ed.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapointe, S. G. (1977). Recursiveness and deletion. Linguistic Analysis 3. 227–65.Google Scholar
Leist, A. (ed.) (1975). Ansätze zur materialistischen Sprachtheorie. Monographien: Linguistik und Kommunikationswissenschaft 22. Kronberg/TS.: Scriptor.Google Scholar
Levin, J. (1981). Review of Krysin & Shmelev (eds.) and Desheriev. Language in Society 10. 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Napoli, D. (1981). Review of Newmeyer. Language 57. 456–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, F. (1977). Review of Rossi-Landi. Language 53. 254–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, S., & Ritchie, R. (1969). A note on the universal base hypothesis. Journal of Linguistics 5. 150–02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, S., & Ritchie, R. (1971). On restricting the base component of transformational grammars. Information and Control 18. 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, S., & Ritchie, R. (1973). On the generative power of transformationl grammars. Information Sciences 6. 49–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rounds, W. C. (1973). Complexity of recognition in intermediate-level languages. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory. Northridge, Calif.: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. 145–58.Google Scholar
Rounds, W. C. (1975). A grammatical characterization of exponential-time languages. Proceedings of the i6th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Northridge, Calif.: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. 135–43.Google Scholar
Smith, N., & Wilson, D. (1979). Modern linguistics: The results of Chomsky's revolution. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Uspenskij, B., & Zivov, V. (1976). Sprachbeschreibung und sprachliche Universalien. In Girke, W. & Jachnow, H. (eds.), Theoretische Linguistik in Osteuropa. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. 140–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar