Remark: Putting phases in perspective

Syntax

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 204-222

  Boeckx, Cedric ^a   Grohmann, Kleanthes K ^b  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547922055     PISSN: 13680005     EISSN: 14679612     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9612.2007.00098.x     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. ABELS, K. 2003. Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
2. BAKER, M., K. JOHNSON & I. ROBERTS. 1989. Passive arguments raised. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 219-251.
3. BOBALJIK, J. D. & S. WURMBRAND. 2005. The domain of agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23: 809-865.
4. BOECKX, C. 2000. EPP eliminated. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
5. BOECKX, C. 2001. Scope reconstruction and A-movement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 19: 503-548.
6. BOECKX, C. in press. Aspects of the syntax of agreement. London: Routledge.
7. BOECKX, C. 2003. Islands and chains. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
8. BOECKX, C. 2006. Linguistic minimalism: Origins, concepts, methods, and aims. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. BOECKX, C. in press b. Some notes on bounding. Language Research.
10. BOECKX, C. To appear. Bare syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. BOECKX, C. & N. HORNSTEIN. To appear. Superiority, reconstruction, and islands. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory, ed. R. Freidin, C. P. Otero & M.-L. Zubizaretta. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Bošković, Ž. 2002. A-movement and the EPP. Syntax 5: 167-218.
13. Bošković, Ž. To appear. On the locality of Move and Agree. Linguistic Inquiry.
14. BOUCHARD, D. 2002. Adjectives, number, and interfaces: Why languages vary. Oxford: Elsevier.
15. BROEKHUIS, H. 2006. Extraction from subjects: Some remarks on Chomsky's "On phases" In Organizing grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, ed. H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinhenz & J. Koster, 59-68. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
16. BRODY, M. 1997. Perfect chains. In Elements of grammar: Handbook of generative syntax, ed. L. Haegeman, 139-167. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
17. BRODY, M. 2002. On the status of derivations and representations. In Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program, ed. S. D. Epstein & T. D. Seely, 19-41. Oxford: Blackwell.
18. 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: 63-103.
19. CEPLOVA, M. 2001. Minimalist islands - restricting P-features. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
20. CHOMSKY, N. 1955/1975. The logical structure of linguistic theory. Mimeograph, Harvard University. Published as Chomsky, N. 1975. The logical structure of linguistic theory. New York: Plenum.
21. CHOMSKY, N. 1973. Conditions on transformations. In A festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. S. R. Anderson & P. Kiparsky, 232-286. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
22. CHOMSKY, N. 1986a. Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. CHOMSKY, N. 1986b. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.
24. CHOMSKY, N. 1993. A Minimalist Program for linguistic theory. In The view from Building 20. Essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. K. Hale & S. J. Keyser, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Reprinted in Chomsky 1995:167-217.]
25. CHOMSKY, N. 1994. Bare Phrase Structure. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 5. [Reprinted in Government and binding theory and the Minimalist Program, ed. G. Webelhuth, 383-439. Oxford: Blackwell, 1995.]
26. CHOMSKY, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. 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, 89-155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. CHOMSKY, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. CHOMSKY, N. 2002. On nature and language, ed. A. Belletti & L. Rizzi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. CHOMSKY, N. 2004a. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 3, ed. A. Belletti, 104-131. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31. CHOMSKY, N. 2004b. The generative enterprise revisited. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
32. CHOMSKY, N. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 1-22.
33. CHOMSKY, N. To appear. On phases. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory, ed. R. Freidin, C. P. Otero & M.-L. Zubizaretta. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Quotations from prepublication ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA, 2005.]
34. CINQUE, G. 1978. Towards a unified treatment of island constraints. In Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft: Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Linguists, 344-348.
35. COLLINS, C. 1994. Economy of derivation and the proper binding condition. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 45-61.
36. EPSTEIN, S. D. 2007. On I(nternalist)-functional explanation in minimalism. Linguistic Analysis 33 (1-2): 20-53.
37. EPSTEIN, S. D., E. M. GROAT, R. KAWASHIMA & H. KITAHARA. 1998. A derivational approach to syntactic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. EPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY. 2002. Rule applications as cycles in a level-free syntax. In Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program, ed. S. D. Epstein & T. D. Seely, 65-89. Oxford: Blackwell.
39. EPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY. 2006. Transformations and derivations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. FELSER, C. 2003. Wh-copying, phases, and successive cyclicity. Lingua 114: 543-574.
41. FOX, D. 2000. Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. FOX, D. & H. LASNIK. 2003. Successive-cyclic movement and island repair: The difference between sluicing and VP-ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 143-155.
43. FOX, D. & D. PESETSKY. 2005. Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics 31: 1-45.
44. GALLEGO, Á. J. 2004. Phase effects in (Iberian) Romance. Ms., Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
45. GALLEGO, Á. J. 2007. Phases and parametric variation. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
46. GROHMANN, K. K. 2000. Prolific peripheries: A radical view from the left. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
47. GROHMANN, K. K. 2003a. Prolific domains: On the anti-locality of movement dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
48. GROHMANN, K. K. 2003b. Successive cyclicity under (anti-)local considerations. Syntax 6: 260-312.
49. GROHMANN, K. K. 2007. Transfer vs. Spell-Out and the road to PF. Linguistic Analysis 33 (1-2): 176-194.
50. GROHMANN, K. K., J. DRURY & J. C. CASTILLO. 2000. No more EPP. In WCCFL 19: Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. R. Billerey & B.D. Lillehaugen., 153-166. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
51. HIRAIWA, K. 2003. Cyclic locality. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
52. HORNSTEIN, N. 2001. Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Oxford: Blackwell.
53. HORNSTEIN, N., J. NUNES & K. K. GROHMANN. 2005. Understanding minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. JEONG, Y. 2007. Applicatives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
55. JOHNSON, K. 2002. Towards an etiology of adjunct islands. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
56. KAYNE, R. S. 2004. Antisymmetry and Japanese. In Variation and universals of biolinguistics, ed. L. Jenkins, 3-35. Oxford: Elsevier.
57. KO, H. 2005. Syntactic edges and linearization. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
58. KOOPMAN, H. & D. SPORTICHE. 1982. Variables and the Bijection Principle. The Linguistic Review 2: 139-160.
59. van de KOOT, H. 1989. The vacuous movement hypothesis, superiority, and the ECP. In Formal parameters of generative grammar 4, ed. G. De Haan & W. Zonneveld, 41-51. Utrecht: OTS Yearbook 1988.
60. LASNIK, H. 1999. Minimalist analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
61. LASNIK, H. & J. URIAGEREKA with C. BOECKX. 2005. A course in minimalist syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
62. LEE-SCHOENFELD, V. 2005. Beyond coherence: The syntax of opacity in German. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.
63. LEGATE, J. 2002. Some interface properties of the phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 506-516.
64. LEGATE, J. 2003. Phases in "Beyond explanatory adequacy." Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
65. LIGHTFOOT, D. W. & A. WEINBERG. 1988. Review of N. Chomsky, Barriers. Language 64: 366-383.
66. MANZINI, M. R. 1994. Locality, minimality, and parasitic gaps. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 481-508.
67. MANZINI, M. R. & A. ROUSSOU. 2000. A minimalist approach to A-movement and control. Lingua 110: 409-447.
68. MARUšIč, F. 2005. On non-simultaneous phases. Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York, Stony Brook.
69. MATUSHANSKY, O. 2005. Going through a phase. In Proceedings of the MIT Workshop on EPP and Phases, ed. M. Mcginnis & N. Richards, 157-181. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
70. MAY, R. 1985. Logical Form: Its structure and derivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
71. M c GINNIS, M. 2001. Variation in the phase structure of applicatives. In Linguistics variation yearbook: Vol. 1 (2001), ed. P. Pica with J. Rooryck, 105-146. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
72. NEELEMAN, A. & H. van de KOOT. 2002. The configurational matrix. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 529-574.
73. NISSENBAUM, J. 2000. Investigations of covert phrase movement. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
74. OCHI, M. 1999. Constraints on feature checking. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
75. PESETSKY, D. & E. TORREGO. 2004. Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In The syntax of time, ed. J. Guéron & J. Lecarme, 495-538. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
76. PLATZACK, C. 2001. Multiple interfaces. In Cognitive interfaces, ed. U. Nikanne & E. van der zee, 21-53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
77. POSTAL, P. M. 1997. Islands. Ms., New York University.
78. RICHARDS, N. 2002. Very local A-bar movement in a root-first derivation. In Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program, ed. S. D. Epstein & T. D. Seely, 227-248. Oxford: Blackwell.
79. van RIEMSDIJK, H. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness: The binding nature of prepositional phrases. Dordrecht: Foris.
80. RIZZI, L. 1990. Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
81. SPORTICHE, D. 1990/1998. Movement, agreement, and case. Ms., University of California, Los Angeles. [Published in Sportiche, D. 1998. Partitions and atoms of clause structure: Subjects, agreement, case, and clitics. London: Routledge.]
82. SVENONIUS, P. 2004. On the Edge. In Peripheries: Syntactic edges and their effects, ed. D. Adger, C. de Cat & G. Tsoulas, 259-287. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
83. TAKAHASHI, D. 1994. Minimality of movement. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
84. URIAGEREKA, J. 1999a. Multiple spell out. In Working minimalism, ed. S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein, 251-282. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
85. URIAGEREKA, J. 1999b. Minimal restrictions on Basque movements. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17: 403-444.
86. URIAGEREKA, J. 2003. Spell-out consequences. Ms., University of Maryland, College Park.
87. WAGNER, M. 2005. Prosody and recursion. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.