Double objects again

Linguistic Inquiry

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 97-124

  Beck, Sigrid ^a   Johnson, Kyle ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Complement structure; Double object constructions; Lexical decomposition (in syntax); Restitutive again; Resultatives

Indexed keywords

EID: 21644435531     PISSN: 00243892     EISSN: 00243892     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/002438904322793356     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Aske, Jon. 1989. Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. by Kira Hall, Michael Meacham, and Richard Shapiro, 1-15. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistics Society.
2. Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Barss, Andrew, and Howard Lasnik. 1986. A note on anaphora and double objects. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 347-354.
4. Beck, Sigrid, and William Snyder. 2001. The resultative parameter and restitutive 'again'. In Auditur vox sapientiae: A festschrift for Amim von Stechow, ed. by Caroline Féry and Wolfgang Sternefeld, 48-69. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
5. Bruening, Benjamin. 2001. QR obeys Superiority: Frozen scope and ACD. Linguistic Inquiry 32:233-273.
6. Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
7. Collins, Chris, and Höskuldur Thráinsson. 1993. Object shift in double object constructions and the theory of Case. In Papers on Case and agreement II, ed. by Colin Phillips, 131-174. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 19. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MITWPL.
8. Davidson, Donald. 1967. The logical form of action sentences. In The logic of decision and action, ed. by Nicholas Rescher, 81-95. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.
9. Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
10. Dikken, Marcel den. 1992. Particles. Dordrecht: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
11. Dowty, David R. 1979. Word meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
12. Emonds, Joseph. 1972. Evidence that indirect object movement is a structure-preserving rule. Foundations of Language 8:546-561.
13. Emonds, Joseph. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax. New York: Academic Press.
14. Emonds, Joseph. 1993. Projecting indirect objects. The Linguistic Review 10:211-263.
15. Fabricius-Hansen, Catherine. 2001. Wi(e)der and again(st). In Auditur vox sapientiae: A festschrift for Arnim von Stechow, ed. by Caroline Féry and Wolfgang Sternefeld, 101-130. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
16. Fillmore, Charles. 1965. Indirect object constructions in English and the ordering of transformations. The Hague: Mouton.
17. Freeze, Ray. 1992. Existentials and other locatives. Language 68:553-595.
18. Green, Georgia M. 1974. Semantics and syntactic regularity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
19. Gropen, Jess, Steven Pinker, Michelle Hollander, Richard Godberg, and Ronald Wilson. 1989. The learn-ability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English. Language 65:203-257.
20. Hale, Kenneth, and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In The view from Building 20, ed. by Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 53-110. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
21. Hale, Ken, and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1997. On the complex nature of simple predicates. In Complex predicates, ed. by Alex Alsina, Joan Bresnan, and Peter Sells, 29-66. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.
22. Harley, Heidi. 1996. If you have Have, you can Give. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by Brian Agbayani and Sze-Wing Tang, 193-207. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.
23. Harley, Heidi. 2003. Possession and the double object construction. In Yearbook of linguistic variation, ed. by Pierre Pica and Johan Rooryck, 29-62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
24. Heim, Irene, and Angelika Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.
25. Jäger, Gerhard, and Reinhart Blutner. 2000. Against lexical decomposition in syntax. In The Proceedings of Israel Association of Theoretical Linguistics 16, ed. by Adam Zachary Wyner, 113-137. Haifa: Haifa University.
26. Johnson, Kyle. 1991. Object positions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 9:577-636.
27. Kayne, Richard S. 1984a. Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.
28. Kayne, Richard S. 1984b. Principles of particle constructions. In Grammatical representation, ed. by Jacqueline Guéron, Hans-Georg Obenauer, and Jean-Yves Pollock, 101-140. Dordrecht: Foris.
29. Kayne, Richard S. 1984c. Unambiguous paths. In Connectedness and binary branching, 129-164. Dordrecht: Foris.
30. Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Phrase structure and the lexicon, ed. by Johan Rooryck and Laurie Zaring, 109-137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
31. Landman, Fred. 1992. The progressive. Natural Language Semantics 1:1-32.
32. Larson, Richard. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19:335-392.
33. Larson, Richard. 1990. Double objects revisited: Reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry 21:589-632.
34. Levin, Beth, and Tova R. Rapoport. 1988. Lexical subordination. In CLS 24, ed. by Lynn MacLeod, Gary Larson, and Diane Brentari, 275-289. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.
35. Lewis, David. 1973. Causation. The Journal of Philosophy 70.17:556-567.
36. Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
37. McCawley, James D. 1968. The role of semantics in a grammar. In Universals in linguistic theory, ed. by Emmon Bach and Richard Harms, 124-169. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
38. Oda, Toshiko. To appear. Again in Japanese and the visibility parameter. In University of Connecticut working papers in linguistics 13.
39. Oehrle, Richard. 1976. The grammatical status of the English dative alternation. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
40. Parsons, Terence. 1990. Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
41. Pesetsky, David. 1982. Paths and categories. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
42. Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
43. Rapp, Irene, and Arnim von Stechow. 1999. Fast "almost" and the visibility parameter for functional adverbs. Journal of Semantics 16:149-204.
44. Richards, Norvin W. 1997. What moves where when in which language? Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
45. Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
46. Ross, John Robert. 1974. Nouniness. In Three dimensions of linguistic theory, ed. by Osamu Fujimura, 137-257. Tokyo: TEC Corporation.
47. Snyder, William. 2001. On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language 77:324-342.
48. Stechow, Arnim von. 1995. Lexical decomposition in syntax. In The lexicon in the organization of language, ed. by Urs Egli, Peter E. Pause, Christoph Schwarze, Arnim von Stechow, and Götz Wienold, 81-118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
49. Stechow, Arnim von. 1996. The different readings of wieder "again": A structural account. Journal of Semantics 13:87-138.
50. Stechow, Arnim von. 2001. Temporally opaque arguments in verbs of creation. In Semantic interfaces: Reference, anaphora and aspect, ed. by Carlo Cecchetto, Gennaro Chierchia, and Maria Teresa Guasti, 278-319. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.
51. Talmy, Leonard. 1991. Path to realization - via aspect and result. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. by Laurel A. Sutton, Christopher Johnson, and Ruth Shields, 480-519. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistics Society.
52. Zaenen, Annie, Joan Maling, and Höskuldur Thráinsson. 1985. Case and grammatical functions: The Icelandic passive. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3:441-483.