Catenae: Introducing a Novel Unit of Syntactic Analysis

Syntax

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 354-396

  Osborne, Timothy ^a   Putnam, Michael ^b   Groß, Thomas ^c  

^a Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures ^*  (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c AICHI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869883861     PISSN: 13680005     EISSN: 14679612     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00172.x     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Ágel, V., L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. J. Heringer & H. Lobin, eds. 2003. Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
2. Baltin, M. 1987. Do antecedent-contained deletions exist? Linguistic Inquiry 18:579-595.
3. Bouton, L. 1970. Antecedent-contained pro-forms. In Proceedings of the sixth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. M. Campbell, 154-167. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4. Brody, M. 2000. Mirror Theory: Syntactic representation in Perfect Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 31:29-56.
5. Bröker, N. 2000. Unordered and non-projective dependency grammars. In Les grammaires de dépendance [Dependency grammars] (Traitement automatique des langues 41), ed. S. Kahane, 79-111. Paris: Hermes.
6. Bröker, N. 2003. Formal foundations of dependency grammar. In Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. V. Ágel, L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. J. Heringer & H. Lobin, vol.1, 294-310. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
7. Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton and Co.
8. Duchier, D. & R. Debusmann. 2001. Topology dependency trees: A constraint-based account of linear precedence. In 39th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Proceedings from the conference, 180-187. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
9. Embick, D. & R. Noyer. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32:555-595.
10. Engel, U. 1994. Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache [Syntax of modern German]. 3rd ed. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.
11. Eroms, H.-W. 1985. Ein reine Dependenzgrammatik für das Deutsche [A pure dependency grammar for German]. Deutsche Sprache 13:306-326.
12. Eroms, H.-W. 2000. Syntax der deutschen Sprache [Syntax of the German language]. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
13. Eroms, H.-W. & H. J. Heringer. 2003. Dependenz und lineare Ordnung [Dependency and linear order]. In Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. V. Ágel, L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. J. Heringer & H. Lobin, vol.1, 247-262. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
14. Fiengo, R. & R. May. 1994. Indices and identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Fillmore, C., P. Kay & M. O'Connor. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64:501-538.
16. Fox, D. 2002. Antecedent-contained deletion and the copy theory of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33:63-96.
17. Goldberg, A. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University Press of Chicago.
18. Goldberg, A. 2006. Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19. Groß, T. 1999. Theoretical foundations of dependency syntax. Munich: Iudicium.
20. Groß, T. 2010. Chains in syntax and morphology. In Proceedings of the 24th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation at Tohoku University, ed. O. Ryo, K. Ishikawa, H. Uemoto, K. Yoshimoto & Y. Harada, 143-152. Tokyo: Waseda University.
21. Groß, T. & T. Osborne. 2009. Toward a practical DG theory of discontinuities. Sky Journal of Linguistics 22:43-90.
22. Haïk, I. 1987. Bound VPs that need to be. Linguistics and Philosophy 10:503-530.
23. Halle, M. & A. Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The view from Building 20, ed. K. Hale & S. Keyser, 111-176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Hankamer, J. 1973. Unacceptable ambiguity. Linguistic Inquiry 4:17-68.
25. Harley, H. 2002. ACO, ACD, and QR of DPs. Linguistic Inquiry 33:659-664.
26. Hays, D. 1964. Dependency theory: A formalism and some observations. Language 40:511-525.
27. Hellwig, P. 2003. Dependency Unification Grammar. In Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. V. Ágel, L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. J. Heringer & H. Lobin, vol. 1, 593-635. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
28. Heringer, H. J. 1996. Deutsche Syntax Dependentiell [German syntax as dependencies]. Tübingen, Germany: Staufenberg.
29. Horn, G. 2003. Idioms, metaphors, and syntactic mobility. Journal of Linguistics 39:245-273.
30. Hudson, R. 1984. Word Grammar. New York: Basil Blackwell.
31. Hyvärinen, I. 2003. Der verbale Valenzträger. In Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. V. Ágel, L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. J. Heringer & H. Lobin, vol. 1, 738-763. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
32. Jackendoff, R. 1971. Gapping and related rules. Linguistic Inquiry 2:21-35.
33. Jayaseelan, K. A. 1990. Incomplete VP deletion and gapping. Linguistic Analysis 20:64-81.
34. Johnson, K. 2001. What VP ellipsis can do and what it can't, but not why. In The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, ed. M. Baltin & C. Collins, 439-474. Oxford: Blackwell.
35. Johnson, K. 2008. The view of QR from ellipsis. In Topics in ellipsis, ed. K. Johnson, 69-94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Jung, W.-Y. 1995. Syntaktische Relationen im Rahmen der Dependenzgrammatik. Hamburg: Buske.
37. Kahane, S., ed. 2000. Les grammaires de dépendance [Dependency grammars] (Traitement automatique des langues 41). Paris: Hermes.
38. Kay, P. & C. Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What's X doing Y? construction. Language 75:1-33.
39. Kennedy, C. 1997. Antecedent-contained deletion and the syntax of quantification. Linguistic Inquiry 28:662-688.
40. Koopman, H. & D. Sportiche. 1991. The position of subjects. Lingua 85:211-258.
41. Kuno, S. 1981. The syntax of comparative clauses. In Papers from the 17th regional meeting: Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. R. Hendrick, C. Masek & F. Miller, 136-155. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
42. Kunze, J. 1975. Abhängigkeitsgrammatik [Dependency Grammar] (Studia Grammatica 12). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
43. Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44. Larson, R. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19:335-391.
45. Larson, R. & R. May. 1990. Antecedent containment or vacuous movement: Reply to Baltin. Linguistic Inquiry 21:103-122.
46. Lasnik, H. 1999. Pseudogapping puzzles. In Fragments: Studies in ellipsis and gapping, ed. S. Lappin & E. Benmamoun, 141-174. New York: Oxford University Press.
47. Lobin, H. 1993. Koordinationssyantax als prozedurales Phänomen [The syntax of coordination as a procedural phenomenon] (Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 46). Tübingen, Germany: Narr.
48. Matthews, P. 1981. Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49. May, R. 1985. Logical Form: Its structure and derivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
50. Mel'čuk, I. 1988. Dependency syntax: Theory and practice. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
51. Merchant, J. 2001. The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and identity in ellipsis. New York: Oxford University Press.
52. Merchant, J. 2004. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27:661-738.
53. Neijt, A. 1980. Gapping: A contribution to sentence grammar. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Foris.
54. Nunberg, G., I. Sag & T. Wasow. 1994. Idioms. Language 70:491-538.
55. O'Grady, W. 1998. The syntax of idioms. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16:79-312.
56. Osborne, T. 2005. Beyond the constituent: A dependency grammar analysis of chains. Folia Linguistica 39:251-297.
57. Osborne, T. 2006. Shared material and grammar: A dependency grammar theory of non-gapping coordination. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 25:39-93.
58. Osborne, T. 2007. The weight of predicates: A dependency grammar analysis of predicate weight in German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 19:23-72.
59. Osborne, T. 2008. Major constituents: And two dependency grammar constraints on sharing in coordination. Linguistics 46:1109-1165.
60. Pickering, M. & G. Barry. 1993. Dependency Categorial Grammar and coordination. Linguistics 31:855-902.
61. Robinson, J. 1970. Dependency structures and transformational rules. Language 46:259-285.
62. Sag, I. 1976. Deletion and Logical Form. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
63. Schubert, K. 1988. Metataxis: Contrastive dependency syntax for machine translation. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Foris.
64. Siewierska, A. 1988. Word order rules. London: Croom Helm.
65. Sgall, P., E. Hajičová & J. Panevová. 1986. The meaning of the sentence in its semantic and pragmatic aspects. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: D. Reidel.
66. Sportiche, D. 2005. Division of labor between merge and move: Strict locality of selection and apparent reconstruction paradoxes. Ms., University of California, Los Angeles. http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/000163.
67. Starosta, S. 1988. The case for Lexicase: An outline of Lexicase grammatical theory. New York: Pinter Publishers.
68. Tarvainen, K. 2000. Einführung in die Dependenzgrammatik [Introduction to Dependency Grammar]. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer.
69. Tesnière, L. 1959. Éléments de syntaxe structurale [Elements of structural syntax]. Paris: Klincksieck.
70. Tesnière, L. 1969. Éléments de syntaxe structurale [Elements of structural syntax]. 2nd ed. Paris: Klincksieck.