Wanting, having, and getting: A note on Fodor and Lepore 1998

Linguistic Inquiry

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 255-267

  Harley, Heidi ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Atomism; Compositionality; Have; Idiom; Lexical decomposition

Indexed keywords

EID: 23844438986     PISSN: 00243892     EISSN: 00243892     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/002438904323019066     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Bach, Emmon. 1968. Nouns and noun phrases. In Universals in linguistic theory, ed. by Emmon Bach and Robert T. Harms, 91-122. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
2. Beck, Sigrid, and Kyle Johnson. 2004. Double objects again. Linguistic Inquiry 35:97-124.
3. Belvin, Robert Stallings. 1996. Inside events: The non-possessive meanings of possession predicates and the semantic conceptualization of events. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
4. Benveniste, Emile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.
5. Dikken, Marcel den, Richard K. Larson, and Peter Ludlow. 1997. Intensional 'transitive' verbs and concealed complement clauses. Rivista di Linguistica 8:29-46.
6. Dowty, David R. 1979. Word meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
7. Fodor, Jerry A., and Ernie Lepore. 1998. The emptiness of the lexicon: Reflections on James Pustejovsky's The generative lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry 29:269-288.
8. Freeze, Ray. 1992. Existentials and other locatives. Language 68:553-595.
9. Guéron, Jacqueline. 1995. On HAVE and BE. In NELS 26, ed. by Jill N. Beckman, 1:191-206. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA.
10. Harley, Heidi. 1995. Subjects, events and licensing. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
11. Harley, Heidi. 2002. Possession and the double object construction. In The linguistic variation yearbook, vol. 2, ed. by Pierre Pica and Johan Rooryck, 29-68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
12. Harley, Heidi, and Rolf Noyer. 1998. Mixed nominalizations, short verb movement and object shift in English. In NELS 28, ed. by Kiyomi Kusumoto and Pius Tamanji, 1:143-157. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA.
13. Iatridou, Sabine. 2000. The grammatical ingredients of counterfactuality, Linguistic Inquiry 31:231-270.
14. Kayne, Richard. 1993. Towards a modular theory of auxiliary selection. Studia Linguistica 47:3-31.
15. McCawley, James D. 1974. On identifying the remains of deceased clauses. Language Research 9:73-85.
16. McIntyre, Andrew. 2002. The verb get and the syntactic semantics of VP. Ms., University of Leipzig, http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~angling/mcintyre.
17. McIntyre, Andrew. 2003. The German dative, HAVE, and the syntactic decomposition of verbs. Ms., University of Leipzig, http://www.uni-leipzig.de/ ~angling/mcintyre.
18. Partee, Barbara. 1974. Opacity and scope. In Semantics and philosophy, ed. by Milton K. Munitz and Peter K. Unger, 81-101. New York: New York University Press.
19. Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero syntax: Experiences and cascades. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
20. Pullum, Geoffrey K. 1997. The morpholexical nature of English to-contraction. Language 73:79-102.
21. Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
22. Quine, Willard van Orman. 1960. Word and object. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
23. Richards, Norvin. 2001. An idiomatic argument for lexical decomposition. Linguistic Inquiry 32:183-192.
24. Ross, John Robert. 1976. To have 'have' and to not have 'have'. In Linguistic and literary studies in honor of Archibald A. Hill, ed. by Mohammad All Jazayery, Edgar C. Polomé, and Werner Winter, I: 263-270. The Hague: Mouton.