Article published in:
Lexical Issues in the Architecture of the Language Faculty
Edited by Andrea Padovan
[Evolutionary Linguistic Theory 2:1] 2020
► pp. 529
References

[ p. 26 ]References

Adger, D.
(2018) The autonomy of syntax. In N. Hornstein, H. Lasnik, P. Patel-Grosz & Charles Yang (Eds.), Syntactic Structures after 60 years: The impact of the Chomskyan revolution in linguistics II (pp. 153–176). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Adger, D., & Svenonius, P.
(2011) Features in minimalist syntax. In Cedric Boeckx (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism (pp. 27–51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C.
(2008) The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Banfield, A.
(1982) Unspeakable sentences. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Berwick, R. C., & Chomsky, N.
(2011) The biolinguistic program: The current state of its development. In A. M. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty (pp. 19–41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2016) Why only us: Language and evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berwick, R. C., Friederici, A. D., Chomsky, N., & Bolhuis, J. J.
(2013) Evolution, brain, and the nature of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 17/2, 89–98. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berwick, R. C., Okanoya, K., Beckers, G., & Bolhuis, J. J.
(2011) Songs to syntax: The linguistics of birdsong. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15/3, 113–121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, C.
(2011) Approaching parameters from below. In A. M. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty, (pp. 205–221). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burton-Roberts, N.
(2011) On the grounding of syntax and the role of phonology in human cognition. Lingua 121, 2089–2102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1957) Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2001) Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2004) Beyond explanatory adequacy. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and beyond. The cartography of syntactic structures vol. 3 (pp. 104–131). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) Approaching UG from Below. In H. M. Gärtner & U. Sauerland (Ed.), Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Chomsky’s Minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics (pp. 1–30). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2008) On phases. In R. Freidin, C. P. Otero & M. L. Zubizarreta (Eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud (pp. 133–166). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 27 ]
(2013) Problems of projection. Lingua 130, 33–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2019b) Some puzzling foundational issues: The Reading program. Catalan Journal of Linguistics. Special Issue. 263–285. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N., Gallego, Á. J., & Ott, D.
(2019) Generative grammar and the faculty of language: Insights, questions, and challenges. Catalan Journal of Linguistics. Special Issue. 229–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cinque, G.
(1999) Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2013) Cognition, Universal Grammar, and typological generalizations. Lingua 130, 50–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collins, C.
(2017) Merge (X, Y) = {X, Y}. In L. Bauke & A. Blühmel (Ed.), Labels and roots (pp. 47–68). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1986) Tense in indirect speech. Folia Linguistica 20, 265–296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Conrod, K.
(2019) Pronouns, raising and emerging. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Corbett, G. G.
(1979) The Agreement Hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics 15, 203–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1991) Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Den Dikken, M.
(2006) Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Embick, D. & Noyer, R.
(2007) Distributed Morphology and the syntax/morphology interface. In G. Ramchand & C. Reiss (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces (pp. 289–324). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. D., Kitahara, H., & Seely, T. D.
(2015) Simplest Merge generates set intersection: Implications for complementizer-trace explanation. In S. Epstein, H. Kitahara & T. D. Seely (Eds.), Explorations in maximizing syntactic minimization (pp. 175–194). New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, M.
(2007) Subjects, topics and the interpretation of referential pro: An interface approach to the linking of (null) pronouns. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25, 691–734. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gallistel, C. R.
(2011) Prelinguistic thought. Language Learning and Development 7, 253–262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. H.
(1978) How does a language acquire gender markers? In J. H. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson & E. A. Moravcsik (Ed.), Universals of Human Language, vol. III, Word Structure, 47–82. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Halle, M. & Marantz, A.
(1993) Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 111–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, H. & Ritter, E.
(2002) Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78, 482–526. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 28 ]
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T.
(2002) The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298, 1569–1579. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hill, V.
(2007) Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua 117, 2077–2105. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O.
(1992) The philosophy of grammar. With a new introduction and index by James D. McCawley. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [first published 1924 in London by George Allen and Unwin].Google Scholar
Katz, J. & Pesetsky, D.
(2011) The Identity Thesis for language and music. http://​ling​.auf​.net​/lingBuzz​/000959
Kiparsky, P.
(2002) Event structure and the perfect. In D. I. Beaver, L. D. Casillas Martínez, B. Z. Clark, & S. Kaufmann (Ed.), The construction of meaning (pp. 113–136). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Kučerová, I.
(2018) ɸ-features at the syntax-semantics interface: Evidence from nominal inflection. Linguistic Inquiry 49, 813–845. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Landau, I.
(2016) Agreement at PF: An argument from partial control. Syntax 19, 79–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Longobardi, G.
(2006) A minimalist program for parametric linguistics? In H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinhenz, & J. Koster (Ed.), Organizing grammar (pp. 407–414). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moro, A.
(2000) Dynamic antisymmetry. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ogihara, T.
(1996) Tense, attitudes, and scope. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach, H.
(1947) Elements of symbolic logic. New York: Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L.
(1997) The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of grammar. Handbook in generative syntax (pp. 281–337). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Roberts, I.
(2019) Parameter hierarchies & Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. & Holmberg, A.
(2010) Introduction: Parameters in Minimalist Theory. In Th. Biberauer, A. Holmberg, I. Roberts, & M. Sheehan (Eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory (pp. 1–57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R.
(1970) On declarative sentences. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar (pp. 222–277). Waltham, MA: Ginn & Co.Google Scholar
Sheehan, M., Biberauer, Th., Roberts, I., & Holmberg, A.
(2017) The final-over-final condition: A syntactic universal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, A.
(2004) Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, E. F.
(2017) Deriving case, agreement and voice phenomena in syntax. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. Á.
(1989) Verbal syntax and case in Icelandic in a comparative GB approach. Doctoral dissertation, Lund University [republished (1992) in Reykjavik: Institute of Linguistics].Google Scholar
(2000) The locus of case and agreement. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 65. 65–108.Google Scholar
(2004) The syntax of Person, Tense, and speech features. Italian Journal of Linguistics 16, 219–251.Google Scholar
[ p. 29 ]
(2006) Agree in syntax, agreement in signs. In C. Boeckx (Ed.), Agreement systems (pp. 201–237). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) On UG and materialization. Linguistic Analysis 37, 367–388.Google Scholar
(2012) Minimalist C/case. Linguistic Inquiry 43, 191–227. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) Context-linked Grammar. Language Sciences 43, 175–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) The Split T Analysis. In K. M. Eide (Ed.), Finiteness matters: On finiteness-related phenomena in natural languages (pp. 79–92). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2019) Gender at the edge. Linguistic Inquiry 50, 723–750. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Speas, P. & Tenny, C. L.
(2003) Configurational properties of point of view roles. In A. M. Di Sciullo (Ed.), Asymmetry in Grammar, Vol. 1, Syntax and semantics (pp. 315–344). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stowell, T.
(2007) The syntactic expression of Tense. Lingua 117, 437–463. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, P.
(2007) Interpreting uninterpretable features. Linguistic Analysis 33, 375–413.Google Scholar
Tallerman, M.
(2014) No syntax saltation in language evolution. Language Sciences 46, 207–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C.
(2016) The price of linguistic productivity: How children learn and break rules of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J.
(2015) Icelandic morphosyntax and argument structure. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. & Zanuttini, R.
(2019) [submitted]. The Syntax of Presentatives: Evidence from English and Italian.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, R., Pak, M., & Portner, P.
(2012) A syntactic analysis of interpretive restrictions on imperative, promissive, and exhortative subjects. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30, 1231–1274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar