The non-concealed nature of free relatives: Implications for connectivity in specificational sentences

Direct Compositionality

Volumn , Issue , 2023, Pages 237-263

  Caponigro, Ivano ^a   Heller, Daphna ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85195977424     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (26)

1. Alexiadou, A. and Giannakidou, A. 1998. 'Specificational pseudoclefts and the semantics of lists', ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 10:1-21.
2. Baker, C. L. 1968. Indirect questions in English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois.
3. Caponigro, I. 2003. Free Not to Ask: On the Semantics of Free Relatives and Wh- words Cross-linguistically. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
4. Cecchetto, C. 2000. 'Connectivity and anti-connectivity in pseudoclefts', in M. Hirotani (ed.), Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistics Society (NELS 30). pp. 137-151. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistics Student Association (GLSA), University of Massachusetts 137-51.
5. Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
6. den Dikken, M., Meinunger, A., and Wilder, C. 2000. 'Pseudoclefts and ellipsis', Studia Linguistica, 54: 41-89.
7. Dor, D. 1992. 'Towards a semantic account of concealed questions', in M. Bernstein (ed.), Proceedings of the Ninth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL '92). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 56-67.
8. Grimshaw, J. 1979. 'Complement selection and the lexicon', Linguistic Inquiry, 10: 279326.
9. Heim, I. 1979. 'Concealed questions', in R. Bäuerle, U. Egli, and A. von Stechow (eds), Semantics from Different Points of View. Berlin: Springer. 51-60.
10. Heller, D. 2002. 'On the relation of connectivity and specificational pseudoclefts', Natural Language Semantics, 10: 243-84.
11. Heller, D. 2005. Identity and Information: Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects of Specificational Sentences. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University.
12. Heycock, C. and Kroch, A. 1999. 'Pseudocleft connectedness: Implications for the LF interface level', Linguistic Inquiry, 30: 365-97.
13. Higgins, R. 1973. The Pseudocleft Construction in English. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
14. Hornstein, N. 1984. Logic as Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Izvorski, R. 1997. 'On the type of be and the nature of the wh-clause in specificational pseudoclefts', paper given at the Workshop on the Syntax and Semantics of (Pseudo-)clefts, ZAS, Berlin, November.
16. Jacobson, P. 1994. 'Binding connectivity in copular sentences', in M. Harvey and L. Santelmann (eds), Proceedings of Fourth Annual Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT IV). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. 161-78.
17. Nathan, L. 2006. On the Interpretation of Concealed Questions. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
18. Peters, S. and Bach, E. 1968. 'Pseudo-cleft sentences', unpublished MS, University of Texas, Austin.
19. Romero, M. 2005, 'Concealed questions and specificational subjects', Linguistics and Philosophy, 28: 687-737.
20. Romero, M. this volume, 'Connectivity in a unified analysis of specificational subjects and concealed questions'.
21. Ross, J. R. 1972. 'Act', in D. Davidson and G. Harman (eds), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht: Reidel, 70-126.
22. Ross, J. R. 1997. 'That is the Question', paper presented at the University of Pennsylvania.
23. Schlenker, P. 2003. 'Clausal equations (A note on the connectivity problem) ', Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21:157-214.
24. Sharvit, Y. 1997. The Syntax and Semantics of Functional Relative Clauses. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University.
25. Sharvit, Y. 1999. 'Connectivity in specificational sentences', Natural Language Semantics, 7: 299-339.
26. Vikner, C. and Jensen, P. A. 2002. 'A semantic analysis of the English genitive. Interaction of lexical and formal semantics', Studia Linguistica, 56:191-226.