Phi-Feature Competition in Morphology and Syntax

Phi Theory: Phi-Features across Modules and Interfaces

Volumn , Issue , 2023, Pages 155-184

  McGinnis, Martha ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

agreement; dependent; position; syntactic; triggers

Indexed keywords

EID: 85188404776     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199213764.003.0006     Document Type: Chapter

References (45)

1. Alexiadou, A. (2001). Functional Structure in Nominals: Nominalization and Ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2. Amritavalli, R. (2000). ‘Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Kannada’, in B. Lust, K. Wali, J. Gair, and K. V. Subbarao (eds.), Lexical Anaphors and Pronouns in Selected South Asian Languages: A Principled Typology. Berlin:Mouton deGruyter, 49-112.
3. Anagnostopoulou, E. (2003). The Syntax of Ditransitives: Evidence from Clitics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
4. Anderson, S. R. (1992). A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Arad, M. (1999). ‘VP-structure and the Syntax-Lexicon interface.' Doctoral dissertation, University College London.
6. Aronson, H. I. (1990). Georgian: A Reading Grammar. Corrected edition. Columbus, OH: Slavica.
7. Baker, M. C. (1988). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8. Béjar, S. (2003). ‘Phi-syntax: A theory of agreement.' Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto. Published by TorontoWorking Papers in Linguistics.
9. Bloomfield, L. (1962). The Menomini Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.
10. Bonet, E. 1991. ‘Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in Romance.' Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Published by MITWorking Papers in Linguistics.
11. Bruening, B. (2001). ‘Syntax at the edge: Cross-clausal phenomena and the syntax of Passamaquoddy.' Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Published by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
12. Carmack, S. (1997). ‘Blocking in Georgian verbal morphology’, Language 73: 314-38.
13. Chomsky, N. (1970). ‘Remarks on nominalization’, in R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham, MA: Blaisdell Publishing, 184-221. Reprinted in D. J. Napoli and E. Norwood Rando (eds.) (1979), Syntactic Argumentation. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 138-83.
14. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Chomsky, N. (2001). ‘Derivation by phase’, in M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1-52.
16. Cowper, E. A. (1989). ‘Perfect-en IS passive-en’, in J. Fee and K. Hunt (eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, 85-93.
17. Déchaine, R.-M. (1999). ‘What Algonquian morphology is really like: Hockett revisited’, in L. Bar-El, R.-M. Déchaine, and C. Reinholtz (eds.), Papers from the Workshop on Structure and Constituency in Native American Languages: MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 17. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 25-72.
18. Ellis, C. D. (1983). Spoken Cree (West of James Bay). Revised edition. Edmonton: Pica Pica Press.
19. Embick, D. (1997). ‘Voice and the interfaces of syntax.' Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
20. Fu, J., T. Roeper, and H. Borer (2001). ‘The VP within process nominals: Evidence from adverbs and the VP anaphor do-so’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19:549-82.
21. Hale, K., and S. J. Keyser (1993). ‘On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations’, in K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20:Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 53-109.
22. Hale, K., and S. J. Keyser (2002). Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
23. Halle, M., and A. Marantz (1993). ‘Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection’, in K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 111-76.
24. Harley, H., and E. Ritter (2002). ‘Person and number in pronouns: A featuregeometric analysis’, Language 78: 482-526.
25. Harris, A. (1981). Georgian Syntax: A Study in Relational Grammar. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
26. Hoekstra, T. (1984). Transitivity: Grammatical Relations in Government-Binding Theory. Dordrecht: Foris.
27. Iatridou, S., E. Anagnostopoulou, and R. Izvorski (2001). ‘Observations about the form and meaning of the perfect’, in M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 189-238.
28. Kayne, R. S. (1993). ‘Toward a modular theory of auxiliary selection’, Studia Linguistica 47: 3-31.
29. Lidz, J. (1996). ‘Dimensions of reflexivity.' Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware.
30. Lidz, J. (2001). ‘The argument structure of verbal reflexives’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19: 311-53.
31. Marantz, A. (1989). ‘Relations and configurations in Georgian.' Ms., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
32. Marantz, A. (1991). ‘Case and licensing’, in G. Westphal, B. Ao, and H.-R. Chae (eds.), ESCOL '91: Proceedings of the Eighth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, 234-53. Reprinted in E. Reuland (ed.) (2000), Arguments and Case: Explaining Burzio’s Generalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 11-30.
33. Marantz, A. (1997). ‘No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon’, in A. Dimitriadis, L. Siegel, C. Surek-Clark, and A. Williams (eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. University of PennsylvaniaWorking Papers in Linguistics 4.2, 201-25.
34. Massey, V. W. (1991). ‘Compositionality and constituency in Albanian.' Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Published by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics as MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 3 (1992).
35. McGinnis, M. (1995). ‘Fission as feature-movement,' in R. Pensalfini and H. Ura (eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27, 165-87.
36. McGinnis, M. (2004). ‘Lethal ambiguity’, Linguistic Inquiry 35: 47-95.
37. McGinnis, M. (2005). ‘On markedness asymmetries in person and number’, Language 81:699-718.
38. Nash, L. (1995). ‘Portée argumentale et marquage casuel dans les langues SOV et dans les langues ergatives: L’example du géorgien’. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Paris 8.
39. Nichols, L. (2001). ‘The syntactic basis of referential hierarchy phenomena: Clues from languages with and without morphological case’, Lingua 111: 515-37.
40. Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Řezáč, M. (2003). ‘The fine structure of cyclic Agree’, Syntax 6: 156-82.
42. Rhodes, R. (1976). ‘The morphosyntax of the Central Ojibwa verb.' Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.
43. Rizzi, L. (1986). ‘On chain formation’, in H. Borer (ed.), The Syntax of Pronominal Clitics: Syntax and Semantics 19. New York: Academic Press, 65-95.
44. Roberts, I. (1986). The Representation of Implicit and Dethematized Subjects. Dordrecht:Foris.
45. Wunderlich, D., and M. Krämer (1999). ‘Transitivity alternations in Yucatec, and the correlation between aspect and argument roles’, Linguistics 37: 431-79.