EPP in T: More controversial subjects

Syntax

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 65-80

  Epstein, Samuel David ^a   Pires, Acrisio ^a   Seely, T Daniel ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27844461614     PISSN: 13680005     EISSN: 14679612     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9612.2005.00075.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. ALLEN, M. 1978. Morphological investigations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
2. ALEXIADOU, A. & A. ANAGNOSTOPOULOU. 1998. Parameterizing Agr: Word order, V-movement, and EPP-checking, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16:491-531.
3. AN, D.-H. 2003. Sometimes in [Spec, CP] and sometimes not? Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
4. AN, D.-H. 2004. Clauses in non-canonical positions in PF. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
5. ANDERSON, S. R. & D. W. LIGHTFOOT. 2002. The language organ: Linguistics as cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. BELLETTI, A. 1988. The case of unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry 19:1-34.
7. BERWICK, R. & S. D. EPSTEIN. 1995. On the convergence of "minimalist" syntax and Categorial Grammar. In Algebraic methods in language processing 1995: Proceedings of the twentieth Workshop on Language Technology 10. Enschede, the Netherlands: Universiteit Twente.
8. BOECKX, C. 2000. EPP eliminated. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
9. BOŠKOVIĆ, Ž. 1997. The syntax of nonfinite complementation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
10. BOŠKOVIĆ, Ž. 2002. A-movement and the EPP. Syntax 5:167-218.
11. BOŠKOVIĆ, Ž. & H. LASNIK. 2003. On the distribution of null complementizers. Linguistic Inquiry 34:527-546.
12. CASTILLO, J. C., J. DRURY & K. K. GROHMANN. 1999. Merge over Move and the Extended Projection Principle. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 8:66-103.
13. CHOMSKY, N. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
14. CHOMSKY, N. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, ed. R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum, 184-221. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn Press.
15. CHOMSKY, N. 1975. Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.
16. CHOMSKY, N. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
17. CHOMSKY, N. 1986. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger.
18. CHOMSKY, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
19. CHOMSKY, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka, 89-156. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
20. CHOMSKY, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
21. CHOMSKY, N. 2002. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Structures and beyond: Current issues in the theory of language, ed. A. Belletti, 104-131. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. CONTRERAS, H. 2003. Wh-movement without intermediate traces. Ms., University of Washington, Seattle.
23. EPSTEIN, S. D. 1994. The derivation of syntactic relations. Ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
24. EPSTEIN, S. D. 1998. Overt scope marking and covert Verb Second. Linguistic Inquiry 29:181-229.
25. EPSTEIN, S. D. 1999. Un-principled syntax and the derivation of syntactic relations. In Working minimalism, ed. S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein, 317-346. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
26. EPSTEIN, S. D., E. GROAT, R. KAWASHIMA & H. KITAHARA. 1998. A derivational approach to syntactic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. EPSTEIN, S. D., A. PIRES & T. D. SEELY 2004. A theory of null complementizers and (the elimination of) the EPP in C. Ms., University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University.
28. EPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY 1999. SPEC-ifying the GF "subject": Eliminating A-chains and the EPP within a derivational model. Ms., University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University; also presented at the LSA Summer Institute, 1999.
29. EPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY, eds. 2002. Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program. Oxford: Blackwell.
30. EPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY. Forthcoming. Derivations in minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. FUKUI, N. & M. SPEAS. 1986. Specifiers and projection. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 8, ed. N. Fukui, T. R. Rapoport & E. Sagey, 128-172. Cambridge, Mass.: MITWPL.
32. GROHMANN, K. K., J. DRURY & J. C. CASTILLO. 2000. No more EPP. In Proceedings of the nineteenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. R. Billerey & B. D. Lillehaugen, 153-166. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press.
33. HALE, K. & S. J. KEYSER. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The view from Building 20: Essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. K. Hale & S. J. Keyser, 53-108. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
34. LASNIK, H. 1992. Case and expletives: Notes toward a parametric account. Linguistic Inquiry 23:381-405.
35. LASNIK, H. 1995. Case and expletives revisited: On Greed and other human failings. Linguistic Inquiry 26:615-633.
36. LASNIK, H. 1999. Syntactic structures revisited: Contemporary lectures on classic transformational grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
37. LASNIK, H. 2001. A note on the EPP. Linguistic Inquiry 32:356-361.
38. LASNIK, H. 2002. On the Extended Projection Principle. Ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
39. LASNIK, H. & J. URIAGEREKA. 1988. A course in GB syntax: Lectures on binding and empty categories. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
40. LIGHTFOOT, D. 2002. The form of innateness claims. Paper presented at the Linguistics Department Colloquium, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
41. MARTIN, R. 1999. Case, the EPP, and minimalism. In Working minimalism, ed. S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein, 1-26. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
42. McCLOSKEY, J. 1997. Subjecthood and subject positions. In Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax, ed. L. Haegeman, 197-235. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
43. MORO, A. 1997. The raising of predicates: Predicative noun phrases and the theory of clause structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. MYERS, S. 1984. Zero-derivation and inflection. In MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 7, ed. M. Speas & R. Sproat, 53-69. Cambridge, Mass.: MITWPL.
45. ORMAZABAL, J. 1995. The syntax of complementation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
46. PESETSKY, D. 1991. Zero syntax: Part 2. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
47. PESETSKY, D. & E. TORREGO. 2001. T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 355-426. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
48. PESETSKY, D. & E. TORREGO. 2004. Tense, Case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In The syntax of time, ed. J. Guéron & J. Lecarme, 495-537. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
49. PIRES, A. 2001a. Clausal and TP-defective gerunds: Control without Tense. In Proceedings of NELS 31, ed. M. Kim & U. Strauss, 389-406. Amherst, Mass.: GLSA Publications.
50. PIRES, A. 2001b. The syntax of gerunds and infinitives: Subjects, Case and control. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
51. ROTHSTEIN, S. 1983. The syntactic form of predication. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
52. STOWELL, T. 1981. Origins of phrase structure. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
53. WILLIAMS, E. 1980. Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 11:208-238.