Impossible primitives

The Compositionality of Meaning and Content: Volume I Foundational Issues

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 213-229

  Mateu, Jaume ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84953718627     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1515/9783110323627.213     Document Type: Chapter

References (35)

1. Baker, M. (1997). Thematic roles and syntactic structures. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
2. Borer, H. (1994). The projection of arguments. In E. Benedicto & J. Runner (Eds.), Functional projections (Vol. 17). University of Massachusetts.
3. Borer, H. (2004). Structuring sense (2 vols.). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
6. Fodor, J. (1970). Three reasons for not deriving kill from cause to die. Linguistic Inquiry, 1, 429-438.
7. Fodor, J. (1998). Concepts. Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
8. Fodor, J., & Lepore, E. (1999). Impossible words? Linguistic Inquiry, 30(3), 445-453.
9. Gleitman, L. (1990). The structural source of verb meanings. Language Acquisition, 1, 3-35.
10. Hale, K. (1986). Notes on world view and semantic categories: Some Warlpiri examples. In P. Muysken & H. Riemsdijk (Eds.), Features and projections. Foris.
11. Hale, K., & Keyser, J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In K. Hale & J. Keyser (Eds.), A view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. MIT Press.
12. Hale, K., & Keyser, J. (1999). A response to Fodor and Lepore: Impossible words? Linguistic Inquiry, 30(3), 453-466.
13. Hale, K., & Keyser, J. (2002). Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. MIT Press.
14. Harley, H. (1995). Subjects, events and licensing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
15. Harley, H. (2002). A minimal(ish) linking theory. (unpublished manuscript)
16. Harley, H. (2003). How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, manner incorporation and the ontology of verb roots in English. In T. Rapoport & N. Shir (Eds.), The syntax of aspect. Oxford University Press. (To appear)
17. Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Johnson, K. (2004). From impossible words to conceptual structure: The role of structure and processes in the lexicon. Mind and Language, 19(3), 334-358.
19. Kiparsky, P. (1997). Remarks on denominal verbs. In A. Alsina, J. Bresnan, & P. Sells (Eds.), Complex predicates. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
20. Kratzer, A. (1996). Severing the external argument from the verb. In J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (Eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
21. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Nouns and verbs. Language (63), 53-94.
22. Langacker, R. W. (1999). Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
23. Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. The University of Chicago Press.
24. Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity. at the syntax-lexical semantics interface. MIT Press.
25. Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. UPenn Working Papers in Linguistics, 4, 201-225.
26. Mateu, J. (2001). Locative and locatum verbs revisited: Evidence from romance. In J. R. Y. d’Hulst & J. Schroten (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 1999. John Benjamins.
27. Mateu, J. (2002). Argument structure: Relational construal at the syntax-semantics interface. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universitat Aut`onoma de Barcelona.
28. Perlmutter, D. (1978). Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. BLS, 4, 157-189.
29. Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Sorace, A. (2000). Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs. Language, 76(4), 859-890.
32. Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Uriagereka, J. (1999). Rhyme and reason. An introduction to minimalist syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Uriagereka, J. (2000). So what’s in a word? Some syntactic notes on the decomposition debate. (Unpublished manuscript)
35. Zaenen, A. (1993). Unaccusativity in Dutch: Integrating syntax and lexical semantics. In J. Pustejovsky (Ed.), Semantics and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.