Article published in:
Interfaces in Romance: A constraint-based approach
Edited by Gabriela Bîlbîie
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 43:1] 2020
► pp. 95128
References

References

Abeillé, A., Clément, L. & Liégeois, L.
2019Un corpus annoté pour le français : le French Treebank. TAL Traitement Automatique des Langues, 60(2), 19–43.Google Scholar
Abeillé, A. & Godard, D.
2007Les relatives sans pronom relatif. In M. Abecassis, Ed., Le francais parlé, Normes et variations, p. 37–60. L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Abeillé, A., Godard, D. & Sabio, F.
2008Two types of NP preposing in French. In S. Müller, Ed., The Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, p. 306–324, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Abeillé, A., Hemforth, B. & Winckel, E.
2016Les relatives en dont du français: études empiriques. In F. Neveu, G. Bergounioux, M.-H. Côté, J.-M. Fournier, L. Hriba & S. Prévost, Eds., 5e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française, volume 27 of SHS Web of Conferences.Google Scholar
Abeillé, A. & Godard, D.
1997The syntax of French negative adverbs. In D. Forget, P. Hirschbuhler & M.-L. Rivero, Eds., Negation and Polarity. John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002The syntactic structures of French auxiliaries. Language, 72, 404–452. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 123 ]
Abeillé, A., Hemforth, B., Winckel, E. & Gibson, E.
2020aExtraction from subjects: Differences in acceptability depend on the discourse function of the construction. Cognition. 204, Article 104293. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2020bSubject island: PP extraction depends on the construction. Poster at the 33rd Annual CUNY Sentence Processing Conference hosted virtually by the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. URL = https://​osf​.io​/ndtvw/
Abeillé, A. & Winckel, E.
2020French subject island? Empirical studies of dont and de qui . Journal of French Language Studies. 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aguila-Multner, G. & Crysmann, B.
2020French clitic climbing as periphrasis. In G. Bîlbîie, Ed., Interfaces in Romance: a constraint-based approach. (This volume) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B. & Goldberg, A.
2008The island status of clausal complements: evidence in favor of an information structure explanation. Cognitive Linguistics, 19(3), 349–381. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, V. & Chesi, C.
2014Subject islands, reconstruction, and the flow of the computation. Linguistic Inquiry, 45(4), 525–569. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bîlbîie, G.
2017Grammaire Des Constructions Elliptiques: Une étude comparative des phrases sans verbe en roumain et en français. Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Bîlbîie, G. & Laurens, F.
2010Towards a non-elliptical analysis of verbless relative adjuncts. Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 51–67.Google Scholar
Bildhauer, F.
2008Representing Information Structure in an HPSG Grammar of Spanish. Ph.d. thesis, Universität Bremen.Google Scholar
Bonami, O., Godard, D. & Marandin, J.-M.
1999Constituency and Word Order in French Subject Inversion. In G. Bouma, E. Hinrichs, G.-J. M. Kruijff & R. Oehrle, Eds., Constraints and Resources in Natural Language Syntax and Semantics, p. 21–40. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bouma, G., Malouf, R. & Sag, I. A.
2001Satisfying Constraints on Extraction and Adjunction. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 19(1), 1–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Branca-Rosoff, S., Fleury, S., Lefeuvre, F. & Pires, M.
2012Discours sur la ville. Présentation du Corpus de Français Parlé Parisien des années 2000 (CFPP2000). URL = http://​cfpp2000​.univ​-paris3​.fr/
Broekhuis, H.
2006Extraction from subjects: some remarks on Chomsky’s “On phases”. In H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinhenz & J. Koster, Eds., Organizing Grammar, p. 59–68. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chaves, R.
2013An expectation-based account of subject islands and parasitism. Journal of Linguistics, 49(2), 297–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chaves, R. P.
2012On the grammar of extraction and coordination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 30(2), 465–512. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chaves, R. P. & Putnam, M. T.
2020Unbounded Dependency Constructions: Theoretical and Experimental Perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
1973Conditions on transformations. In S. Anderson & P. Kiparsky, Eds., A festschrift for Morris Halle, p. 232–285, New York: Winston.Google Scholar
1986Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1995The Minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G.
1990Types of Ā-dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
[ p. 124 ]
Copestake, A.
2001Implementing Typed Feature Structure Grammars. CSLI Lecture Notes. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Copestake, A., Flickinger, D., Pollard, C. & Sag, I.
2005Minimal recursion semantics. Research on Language and Computation, 3, 281–332. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Kuthy, K.
2002Discontinuous NPs in German. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
2020Information structure. In S. Müller, A. Abeillé, R. D. Borsley & J.-P. Koenig, Eds., Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar: The handbook, Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax. Language Science Press. To appear.Google Scholar
Destruel, E.
2012The French c’est-cleft: An empirical study on its meaning and use. In C. Piñon, Ed., Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 9 (Selected papers from CSSP 2011), p. 95–112. CSSP.Google Scholar
Diesing, M.
1992Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Doetjes, J., Rebuschi, G. & Rialland, A.
2004Cleft sentences. In F. Corblin & H. D. Swart, Eds., Handbook of French semantics, p. 529–552. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Engdahl, E. & Vallduví, E.
1996Information packaging in HPSG. In C. Grover & E. Vallduví, Eds., Studies in HPSG, p. 1–31, Edinburgh: Centre for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, N.
1973On the nature of island constraints. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
Gallego, Á. J. & Uriagereka, J.
2007Sub-extraction from subjects: A phase theory account. In J. Camacho, Ed., Romance linguistics 2006, p. 149–162. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ginzburg, J. & Sag, I. A.
2000Interrogative Investigations: the form, meaning, and use of English Interrogatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Godard, D.
1988La syntaxe des relatives en français. Paris: Ed. du Centre national de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
1992Extraction out of NP in French. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 10, 233–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Godard, D. & Sag, I.
1996Quels compléments de nom peut-on extraire en français? Langages, 122, 60–79.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
2006Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2013Backgrounded constituents cannot be extracted. In J. Sprouse & N. Hornstein, Eds., Experimental Syntax and Island Effects, p. 221–238. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, J.
1985A principled exception to the coordinate structure constraint. In Chicago Linguistic Society. Papers from the General Session at the Twenty-First Regional Meeting, volume 1, p. 133–143.Google Scholar
Haegeman, L., Jiménez-Fernández, A. L. & Radford, A.
2014Deconstructing the Subject Condition in terms of cumulative constraint violation. The Linguistic Review, 31, 73–150. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heck, F.
2009On certain properties of pied-piping. Linguistic Inquiry, 40(1), 75–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hofmeister, P.
2011Representational complexity and memory retrieval in language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(3), 376–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hofmeister, P. & Sag, I.
2010Cognitive constraints and island effects. Language, 86(2), 366–415. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.
1982Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Ph.d. thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
[ p. 125 ]
Jackendoff, R.
1972Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, A.
2009On the composite nature of subject islands: A phase-based approach. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 22, 91–138.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. S. & Pollock, J.-Y.
1978Stylistic inversion, successive cyclicity and nove NP in French. Linguistic Inquiry, 9(4), 595–621.Google Scholar
Kehler, A.
2002Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Kluender, R.
1991Cognitive constraint on variables in syntax. Ph.d. thesis, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
2004Are subject islands subject to a processing account? In B. Schmeiser, V. Chand, A. Kelleher & A. Rodriguez, Eds., Proceedings of the WCCFL, volume 23, p. 101–125, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Kluender, R. & Kutas, M.
1993Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 573–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kolliakou, D.
1999De-phrase extractability and individual/property denotation. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 17, 713–781. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M.
2007Basic notions of information structure. In G. F. Caroline Féry & M. Krifka, Eds., Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure (ISIS), Working Papers of the SFB 632, volume 6, p. 13–56, Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar
Kuno, S.
1976Subject, theme, and the speaker’s empathy – a reexamination of relativization phenomena. In C. N. Li, Ed., Subject and Topic, p. 417–444, New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kuroda, S.-Y.
1976Subject. In M. Shibatani, Ed., Japanese Generative Grammar, p. 1–16. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ladusaw, W. A.
1994Thetic and categorical, stage and individual, weak and strong. In M. Harvey & L. Santelmann, Eds., Proceedings of SALT IV, p. 220–229, Ithaca, NY: Cornell U. DMLL.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. et al.
1986Frame semantic control of the coordinate structure constraint. In Chicago Linguistic Society. Papers from the General Session at the Twenty-Second Regional Meeting, volume 2, p. 152–167.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K.
1994Information structure and sentence form : topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, P. & Monachesi, P.
2003Les pronoms clitiques dans les langues romanes. In D. Godard, Ed., Les langues romanes, problèmes de la phrase simple, p. 53–106. Paris: CNRS Éditions.Google Scholar
Miller, P. & Sag, I. A.
1997French clitic movement without clitics or movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 15, 573–639. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moreau, M.-L.
1971 L’homme que je crois qui est venu – que, qui : relatifs et conjonction. Langue française, 11, 77–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1976C’est : étude de syntaxe transformationnelle . Mons: Editions universitaires de Mons.Google Scholar
Müller, S.
2013The CoreGram project: A brief overview and motivation. In D. Duchier & Y. Parmentier, Eds., Proceedings of the Workshop on High-level Methodologies for Grammar Engineering (HMGE 2013), Düsseldorf, p. 93–104.Google Scholar
[ p. 126 ]
Pollard, C. J.
1984Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars, Head Grammars, and natural language. Ph.d. thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Pollard, C. J. & Sag, I. A.
1994Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L.
1982Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht, Holland and Cinnaminson, N.J., U.S.A.: Foris Publications. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. R.
1967Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.d. thesis, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Sag, I. A.
1997English Relative Clause Constructions. Journal of Linguistics, 33(2), 431–484. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010English filler-gap constructions. Language, 86(3), 486–545. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sag, I. A. & Godard, D.
1994Extraction of de-Phrases from the French NP. In Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 24, p. 519–541, Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Song, S.
2017Modeling Information Structure in a cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. & Bellier, P.
1989Le mouvement syntaxique : contraintes et paramètres. Langages, 95, p. 35–80.Google Scholar
Sprouse, J., Caponigro, I., Greco, C. & Cecchetto, C.
2016Experimental syntax and the variation of island effects in English and Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 34(1), 307–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stepanov, A.
2007The end of CED? Minimalism and extraction domains. Syntax, 10(1), 80–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Szabolcsi, A.
2006Strong versus weak islands. In M. Everaert & H. van Riemsdijk, Eds., The Blackwell companion to syntax, p. 480–531. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Takami, K.
1992Preposition Stranding: From Syntactic to Functional Analyses. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tellier, C.
1990Subjacency and Subject Condition violations in French. Linguistic Inquiry, 21(2), 306–311.Google Scholar
1991Licensing theory and French parasitic gaps. Dordrecht, The Netherlands and Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torrego, E.
1985On Empty Categories in Nominals. unpublished ms., University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J.
1988On government. Ph.d. thesis, University of Connecticut. URL = https://​opencommons​.uconn​.edu​/dissertations​/AAI8905987
Uriagereka, Juan
2012Spell-Out and the Minimalist Program. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Valin, R. D. J.
1995Toward a functionalist account of so-called extraction constraints. In B. Devriendt, L. Goossens & J. van der Auwera, Eds., Complex structures: A functionalist perspective, p. 26–60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Webelhuth, G.
2007Complex Topic-Comment Structures in HPSG. In S. Müller, Ed., The Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, p. 306–322, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Zaenen, A.
1983On Syntactic Binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 469–504.Google Scholar
[ p. 127 ]