Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:47:00.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Valentina Bianchi: Consequences of Antisymmetry: Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999, 356 pp. ISBN 3-11-016250-4

Review products

Valentina Bianchi: Consequences of Antisymmetry: Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999, 356 pp. ISBN 3-11-016250-4

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Satu Manninen
Satu Manninen
Affiliation:
Department of English, University of Lund, Helgonabacken 14, SE-223 62 Lund, Sweden. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

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
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , June 2002 , pp. 116 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

Barss, Andrew & Lasnik, Howard. 1986. A Note on Anaphora and Double Objects. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 347–354.Google Scholar
Borsley, Robert. 1997. Relative Clauses and the Theory of Phrase Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 28, 629–647.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1993. On the Evidence for Partial N Movement in the Romance DP. In Cinque, Guglielmo (ed.), Italian Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 287–302.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph. 1979. Appositive Relatives Have No Properties. Linguistic Inquiry 10, 211–243.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 1993. Detached Clauses – The Later the Deeper. Ms. University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. On Larson's Treatment of the Double Object Construction. Linguistic Inquiry 21, 427–456.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1984. Connectedness and Binary Branching. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Koster, Jan. 1995. Extraposition as Coordination. Ms. University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard. 1988. On the Double Object Construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19, 335–391.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1982. The Syntax and Semantics of English Relative Clauses. Lingua 53, 99–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Gereon & Sternefeld, Wolfgang. 1993. Improper Movement and Unambiguous Binding. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 461–507.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 1994. Telegraphic Effects and Optimality. Conference held at the Department of Cognitive Sciences, Instituto Scientifico S. Raffaele, Milan, 05 1994.Google Scholar
Platzack, Christer. 1999. A Complement of N0 Account of Restrictive and Non-Restrictive Relatives: the Case of Swedish. In Alexiadou, Artemis; Law, Paul, Meinunger, André & Wilder, Chris (eds), The Syntax of Relative Clauses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1991. Residual Verb Second and the Wh Criterion. Technical Reports in Formal and Computational Linguistics 2. University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1995. Fine Structure of the left Periphery. Ms. University of Geneva. [Published in Haegeman, Liliane (ed.), Elements of Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 281–337.]Google Scholar
Safir, Ken. 1986. Relative Clauses in the Theory of Binding and Levels. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 663–689.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, Jean Roger. 1974. French Relative Clauses. Ph.D Dissertation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar