REFERENCES

Abraham, W. (2002). Modals: toward explaining the 'episternic non-finiteness gap'. Unpublished manuscript, University of Groningen.

Adam, J.-M. (1992). Si hypothetique et l'imparfait: Une approche linguistique de la fictionalite. Etudes Littkraires, 25, 147-166.

Allen, B. J. & Frantz, D. G. (1978). Verb agreement in Southern Tiwa. Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Linguistic Society, 1 1- 17.

Andersen, R. W. (1984). The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning, 34, 77-95.

Andersen, R. W. (1990). Verbal virtuosity and speakers' purposes. In H. Burmeister & P. L. Rounds (Eds.), Variability in second language acquisition: Proceedings of the Tenth Meeting of the Second Language Research Forum (Vol. 2, pp. 1-24). Eugene: University of Oregon Department of Linguistics.

Andersen, R. W. (1991). Developmental sequences: The emergence of aspect marking in second language acquisition. In T. Huebner & C. A. Ferguson (Eds.), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories (pp. 305-324). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Andersen, R. W. (1993). Four operating principles and input distribution as explanations for underdeveloped and mature morphological systems. In K. Hyltenstam & A. Viberg (Eds.), Progression & regression in language: Sociocultural, neuropsychological, & linguistic perspectives (pp. 309-339). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Andersen, R. W. (1994). The insider's advantage. In A. Giacalone Ramat & M. Vedovelli (Eds.), Italiano: Lingua seconda/lingua straniera [Italian: second languagelforeign language] (pp. 1-26). Rome: Bulzoni.

Andersen, R. W. & Shrai, Y. (1994). Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 133-1 56.

Andersen, R. W. & Shirai, Y. (1996). The primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition: The pidgin-creole connection. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 527-570). San Diego: Academic Press.

Antinucci, F. & Miller, R. (1976). How children talk about what happened. Journal of Child Language, 3, 167-1 89.

Arad, M. (1998). VP-structure and the syntax semantics interface. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 16.

Arefiev, A. (1999). Interval semantics of Russian aspect. M.A. thesis, University of Tromsn.

Asher, N. (1993). Reference to abstract objects in English. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Asher, N. & Lascarides, A. (1994). Intentions and information in discourse.

Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 34-41.

Asher, N. & Lascarides, A. (1998). The semantics and pragmatics of pre- supposition. Journal of Semantics, 15,239-300.

Asher, N . & Lascarides, A. (2001). Indirect speech acts. Synthese, 128, 183-228.

Avrutin, S. (1999). The development of the syntax-discourse interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Avrutin, S. & Cooprnans, P. (2000). Children who build bridges. Proceedings o j BUCLD 24, 80-91.

Aydemir, Y. (2002). The different syntactic and semantic behavior of the objects without case morphology in Turkish: Are preverbal bare nouns syntactic arguments? Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Ayoun, D. (2001). The role of negative and positive feedback in the second language acquisition of passt! compost! and imparfait. Modern Language Journal, 85,226-243.

Ayoun, D. (2002). The effectiveness of written recasts in second language acquisition of aspectual distinctions in French: A follow-up qualitative study. Unpublished manuscript, University of Arizona

Babko-Malaya, 0 . (1997). On aspect and Case in Russian. In M. Lindseth & S. Franks (Eds.), Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (pp. 18-37). Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.

Babko-Malaya, 0 . (1999). Zero morphology: A study of aspect, argument structure and Case. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University.

Bach, E. (1986). The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 5-16. Baker, M. (1985). The Mirror Principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic

Inquiry, 16, 373-415. Baker, M. (1988). Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Baker, M. (1996). Thepolysynthesis parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Baker, M. (1997). Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In L. Haegeman (Ed.),

Elements of grammar (pp. 137-178). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Baker, M. & Stewart, O.T. (1999). Verb movement, objects, and serialization.

Unpublished manuscript, Rutgers University. Bamberg, M. & Marchman, V. (1990). What holds a narrative together? The

linguistic encoding of episode boundaries. Papers in Pragmatics, 4, 58- 121. Banfield, A. (1982). Unspeakable sentences: Narration and representation in the

language offction. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Barbiers, S. (1995). The syntax of interpretation. Ph. D. dissertation, Holland

Institute of Generative Linguistics [HIL Dissertations 141. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1992). The telling of a tale: Discourse structure and tense use in

learner's narratives. In L. F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds.), Pragmatics and Language Learning, Monograph 3 (pp. 144-161). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Division of English as an International Language.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1994). Anecdote or evidence? Evaluating support for hypotheses concerning the development of tense and aspect. In E. Tarone, S. M. Gass, & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Research methodology in second language acquisition (pp. 41-60). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1995). A narrative perspective on the development of the tenselaspect system in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17,263-29 1.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1998). Narrative structure and lexical aspect: Conspiring factors in second language acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20,471 -508.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999a). Examining the role of text type in L2 tense-aspect research: Broadening our horizons. Proceedings of the Third PaclJic Second Language Research Forum, Vol. 1, pp. 129-138.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999b). From morpheme studies to temporal semantics: Tense- aspect research in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 341-382.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, meaning, and use. Oxford: Blackwell.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2002). Analyzing aspect. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.), Tense-aspect morphology in L2 acquisition (pp. 129-154). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Bergstrom, A. (1996). The acquisition of tense and aspect in SLA and FLL: A study of learner narratives in English (SL) and French (FL). Canadian Modern Language Review, 52, 308-330.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Reynolds, D. W. (1995). The role of lexical aspect in the acquisition of tense and aspect. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 107- 13 1.

Bartsch, R. (1976). The grammar of aiiverbials. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Becker, M. & Hyams, N. (1999). Modal reference in children's root infinitives.

Proceedings of the 3oih Annual Child Language Research Forum, 113-122. Behrens, H. (1993). Temporal reference in German child language: Form and

hnction of early verb use. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Bellert, I. (1977). On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs.

Linguistic Inquiry, 8, (2), 337-35 1. Belletti, A. (1990). Generalized verb movement. Turin: Rosenberg & Selier. Belvin, R. S. (1993). The two causative HAVES are the two possessive HAVES. In V.

Lindblad & M. Gamon, (Eds.), Papers from the Fifth Student Conference in Linguistics, MITWPL 20 (pp. 19-34). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Benrnamoun, E. (2000). The feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Benua, L. & Borer, H. (1996). The passivelantipassive alternation. Paper presented at GLOW, Athens.

Benveniste, E. (1971). The nature of pronouns. In Benveniste, E., Problems in general linguistics, (pp. 217-22). Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press.

Berardo, M. (1999). Animacy and Shawnee verbal inflection. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas.

Berger-Morales, J. & Salustri, M. (2003). Participial constructions in child German and Italian: Novel evidence for the separate systems hypothesis. Proceedings of BUCLD 27, 115-126.

Bergstrom, A. (1995). The expression of past temporal reference by English- spealung learners of French. Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.

Berman, R. (1983). Establishing a schema: Children's construals of verb-tense marking. Language Sciences 5, 6 1-78.

Berwick, R. (1985). The acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press. Bickerton, D. (1981). Roots of language. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma. Bickerton, D. (1984). The language bioprogram hypothesis. Behavioral and Brain

Sciences, 7, 173-1 88. Bierwisch, M. (1980). Semantic structure and illocutionary force. In J.R. Searle, F.

Kiefer & M. Bierwisch (Eds.), Speech act theory and pragmatics (pp. 1-35). Dordrecht: Reidel.

Bittner, M. & Hale, K. (1996). Ergativity: Toward a theory of a heterogeneous class. Linguistic Inquiry, 27, 53 1-604.

Blauvelt, Y. (1980). Russian verbal government. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.

Blom, E. (2002). From Root Infinitives to Finite Sentences. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utrecht.

Bloom, L., Lifter, K. & Hafitz, J. (1980). Semantics of verbs and the development of verb inflection in child language. Language 56,386-412.

Blutner, R. (2000). Some aspects of optimality in natural language interpretation. Journal of Semantics 17, 189-2 16.

Bobalijk, J. & Thrainsson, H. (1998). Two heads aren't always better than one. Syntax 1,37-71.

Bonarni, 0 . (2002). A syntax-semantics interface for tense and aspect in French. In F. Van Eynde et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the HPSG Conference 2001 (pp. 3 1- 50). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Bonnotte, I., Kaifer, A., Fayol, M., & Idiazabal-Gorrochategui, I. (1993). R61e des types de process et du co-texte dans l'emploi des formes verbales de la narration. Langue Franqaise, 93, 8 1 - 10 1.

Borer, H. (1994) The projection of arguments. In E. Benedicto & J. Runner, (Eds.), Functional projections. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 17 (pp. 19-47). Amherst, MA: GLSA.

Borer, H. (1998). Passive without theta grids. In S. Lapointe, P. Farrell & D. Brentari (Eds.), Morphology and its relations to phonology and syntax (pp. 60- 99). Stanford: CSLI.

Borer, H. (2001). Exo-skeletal vs. endo-skeletal explanations: syntactic projections and the lexicon. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California.

Borer, H. (2004). Structuring sense. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Borer, H. & Rohrbacher, B. (1997). Features and projections: arguments for the full

competence hypothesis. proceedings of BUCLD 21,24-35. Borik, 0 . (2002). Aspect and reference time. Ph.D. dissertation, University of

Utrecht. Boser, K., Lust, B., Santelmann, L. & Whitman, J. (1992). The syntax of CP and V2

in early child German. Proceedings of NELS 23, 5 1-63. Bres, J. (2002). L'imparfait: l'un etlou le multiple? To appear in P. LarrivCe & E.

Labeau (Eds.), Cahiers Chronos: Nouveaux dLveloppements de l'imparfait. New YorldArnsterdam: Rodopi.

Bronckart, J.-P. & Sinclair, H. (1973). Time, tense, and aspect. Cognition, 2, 107- 130.

Brown, R. (1973). Afirst language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Brun, D., Avrutin, S. & Babyonyshev, M. (1999). Aspect and its temporal

interpretation during the optional infinitive stage in Russian. Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on' Language Develoopment 23, 120-1 3 1.

Bull, W. E. (1960). Time, tense, and the verb. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Biiring, D. (1999). Topic. In P. Bosch & R. van der Sandt (Eds.), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives (pp. 142-165). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Burzio, L. (1986). Italian syntax: A government and binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Butt, M. & Ramchand, G. (2001). Complex aspectual structure in HindiIHurdu. In M. Liakata, B. Jensen & D. Maillat, (Eds.), Oxford University Working Papers in Linguistics, Philology & Phonetics, 6 (pp. 1-30). Oxford: Oxford University.

Bybee, J. L. (1985). Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bybee, J., Perkins, R. & Pagliuca, W. (1994). The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cadierno, T. (2000). The acquisition of Spanish grammatical aspect by Danish advanced language learners. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 4, 1-53.

Caenepeel, M. (1995) Aspect and text structure. Linguistics 33,213-253. Carlson, G. & Pelletier, F. J. (Eds.) ('1995) The generic book. Chicago: University

of Chicago Press. Carter, R. (1976). Some constraints on possible words. Semantikos 1: 27-66. Carter, R. (1988). On linking: Papers by Richard Carter. In B. Levin & C. Tenny,

(Eds.), Lexicon Project Working Papers 25 (pp. 1-93). Cambridge, MA: MIT. Caudal, P. (2000a). La polystmie aspectuelle. PhD. thesis, Universitt Paris 7. Caudal, P. (2000b). Types of telicity, types of paths and types of changes-of-state.

Paper presented at ESSLI 2000 (Workshop on Paths and Telicity in Event Structure), Birmingham, UK.

Caudal, P. & Roussarie, L. (2000). Event structure vs. stage structure and abstract aspectual relations. Proceedings of the 26th Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 361-372.

Caudal, P. & Roussarie, L. (2002). The semantics and pragmatics of si-clauses. Paper presented at Chronos 5, University of Groningen.

Caudal, P. & Vetters, C. (2002a). Un point de w e elliptique sur l'imparfait narratif. To appear in Proceedings of the 'Time and Point of View' Colloquium, December 2001, Paris.

Caudal, P. & Vetters, C. (2002b). Que l'imparfait n'est pas (encore) un prtttrit. To appear in P. Larrivte & E. Labeau (Eds.), Cahiers Chronos: Nouveaux dkveloppements de l'imparfait. Rbdopi, New YorkIAmsterdam.

Caudal, P., Vetters, C. & Roussarie, L. (2002a). Un traitement conjoint du conditionnel, du f i h r et de I'imparfait : les temps c o m e des fonctions d'actes de langage. Paper presented at Chronos 5, University of Groningen.

Caudal, P., Vetters, C. & Roussarie, L. (2002b). L'imparfait, un temps inconstquent. To appear in Langue Franpise.

Chafe, W. (Ed.). (1980). Thepear stories. Nonvood, NJ: Ablex. Chao, Y.R. (1968) A grammar of modern spoken Chinese. Berkeley and Los

Angeles: University of California Press. Chen, D. (1995). UTAH: Chinese psych verbs and beyond. In J. Camacho & L.

Choueiri (Eds.), Proceedings of Sixth North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (pp. 11-25). Los Angeles: GSIL, University of Southern California.

Cheng, L. (1988). Aspects of the ba-construction. In C. Tenny (Ed.), Lexicon Project Working Papers 24: Studies in generative approaches to aspect. (pp. 73-84). Cambridge, MA: MIT. .

Chravate. B. (2002). Aspect in Thai. Ph.D. dissertation, Michgan State University. Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on norninalization. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum,

(Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 184-221). Waltham, MA: Ginn.

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New

York: Praeger. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D.

Michaels & J. Uriagereka (Eds.); Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 89-155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cinque, G. (1988). On si constructions and the theory of arb. Linguistic Inquiy, 1.5, 521-81.

Cinque, G. (1993). A null theory of phrase and compound stress. Linguistic Inquiry, 24,239-298.

Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Collins, C. & Thrainsson, H. (1996) VP-Internal structure and object shift in Icelandic. Linguistic Inquiry, 27, 391-444.

Collins, L. (1999). Marking time: The acquisition of tense and grammatical aspect by French-speaking learners of English. Ph.D. dissertation, Concordia University.

Collins, L. (2002). The roles of Ll influence and lexical aspect in the acquisition of temporal morphology. Language Learning, 52,43-94.

Collins, L. & Segalowitz, N. (2002a). Representing and accessing knowledge in a second language: The case of temporal morphology. Paper presented at AAAL, Salt Lake City.

Collins, L. & Segalowitz, N. (2002b). Talking time. Paper presented to the meeting of the Association for Language Awareness, UmeH, Sweden.

Comajoan, L. (2001). The acquisition of past temporality and past morphology in Catalan as a foreign language. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.

Cornrie, B. (1976). Aspect. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Croft, W. (1990). Typology and universals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer- sity Press.

Dahl, 0. (1984). Temporal distance: Remoteness distinctions in tense-aspect systems. In B. Butterworth, B. Cornrie & 0. Dahl (Eds.), Explanations for language universals (pp. 105- 122). Berlin: Mouton.

Dahl, 0. (1985). Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Danlos, L. (1999). Event coreference in causal discourse. In P. Bouillon & F. Busa

(Eds.), Meaning of words (pp. 2 16-24 1). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Davidson, D. (1967). The logical form of action sentences. In N. Rescher (Ed.), The logic of decision and action (pp. 81-95). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Davis, H. & Demirdache, H. (1995). Agents and events. Paper presented at GLOW 18, University of Tromsla, Norway.

de Haan, G. (1986). A theory-bound approach to the acquisition of verb placement in Dutch. In G. d. Haan & W. Zonneveld (Eds.), Formal parameters of generative grammar 3 (pp. 15-30). Utrecht: University of Utrecht.

de Swart, H. (1998). Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16,347-385.

de Swart, H. & Molendijk, A. (2002). Le pass6 composC narratif. In B. Laca (Ed.), Temps et aspect: De la morphologie ci l'interprdtation (pp. 193-21 1). Paris: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.

Declerck, R. (1989). Boundedness and the structure of situations. Leuvense Bijdragen 78, 275-308.

Deen, K. (1997). The interpretation of root infinitives in English: Is eventivity a factor? Unpublished manuscript, University of California-Los Angeles.

Deen, K. (2002). The acquisition of Nairobi Swahili: The morphosyntax of inflectional prefixes and subjects. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California- Los Angeles.

Degand, L. & Pander Maat, H. (1999). Scaling causal relations in terms of speaker involvement. Proceedings of Levels of Representation in Discourse (LORID '99, University of Edinburgh), 45-53.

Delfitto, D. (2002). Genericity in language: Issues of syntax, logical form, and interpretation. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'orso.

Demirdache, H.. (1991). Resurnptive chains in restrictive relatives, appositives and dislocation structures. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

Demirdache, H. (2003). A 1'Interface syntaxe-stmantique: Questions de rCfCrence nominale et de rCfCrence temporelle. Unpublished manuscript, UniversitC de Nantes.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (1997a). The syntax of temporal relations: A uniform approach to tense and aspect. Proceedings of WCCFL 16, 145-159.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (1997b). The syntactic primitives of temporal relations. Paper presented at Troisieme Colloque International Langues et Gramrnaire, UniversitC de Paris VIII, Paris.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (2000). The primitives of temporal

relations. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 157-186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (2002). Temps, aspects et adverbes. In B. Laca (Ed.), Temps et aspect: De la morphologie 6 l'interprdtation (pp. 125- 175). Paris: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (2004a). The syntax of temporal adverbs. In J. GuCron & J. Lecarme (Eds.), The syntax of time (pp. 143-179). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (2004b). Towards a restrictive theory of the diversity of temporal systems. In A. Giorgi, F. Pianesi & J. Higginbotham (Eds.), Syntax and semantics of tense and mood selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Demirdache, H. & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (in prep). (Re)Setting time. In K. Zagona (Ed.), Lingua Special Issue on Tense.

Dendale, P. & Tasmowski, L. (Eds.) (2001). Le conditionnel en franqais. Paris: Klincksieck.

Depraetere, I. (1995). On the necessity of distinguishing between (un)boundedness and (a)telicity. Linguistics and Philosophy, 18, 1-19.

DesclCs, J-P., & GuentchCva, Z. (1990). Discourse analysis of aorist and imperfect in Bulgarian and French. In N. B. Thelin (Ed.), Verbal aspect in discourse (pp.237-26 1). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Diesing, M. (1997) Yiddish VP order and the typology of object movement in Ger- manic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15,369-427.

Diesing, M . (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dietrich, R., Klein, W. & Noyau, C. (1995). The acquisition of temporality in a

second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Dixon, R.M.W. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Doetjes, J. & Honcoop, M. (1997). The semantics of event-related readings: A case

for pair quantification. In A. Szabolcsi (Ed.), Ways of scope taking (pp. 263- 3 10). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Dowty, D. (1977). Towards a semantic analysis of verb aspect and the English 'imperfective' progressive. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1,45-77.

Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67,

547-619. Drubig, B. (2001). On the syntactic form of epistemic modality. Unpublished

manuscript, University of Tiibingen. Dry, H. (1981). Sentence aspect and the movement of narrative time. Text, 1, 233-

40. Dry, H. (1 983). The movement of narrative time. Journal of Literaly Semantics, 12,

19-53. Duffley, P. (1992). The English infinitive. New York: Longman. Enq, M. (1987). Anchoring conditions for tense. Linguistic Inquiry, 18,633-657. Enq, M. (1986). Towards a referential analysis of tense expressions. Linguistics and

Philosophy 9,405-426. Epstein, S. D., et al. (1998) A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations.

Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Ernst, T. (1997). The scopal basis of adverb licensing. Unpublished manuscript,

Rutgers University. Erteschik-Shir, N. & Rapoport, T. (1997). A theory of verbal projection. In G.

Motos et al. (Eds.), Interfaces in Linguistic Theory (pp. 129-148). Lisboa: Edicbes Colibri.

Ferdinand, A. (1996). The acquisition of the subject in French. Leiden, the Netherlands: HILILeiden University.

Filip, H. (1992). Aspect and interpretation of nominal arguments. Papers from the Twenty-eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 139-158.

Filip, H. (1993). Aspect, situation types and nominal reference. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Filip, H. (1996). Domain restrictions on lexical quantifiers. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Filip, H. (2000). The quantization puzzle. In C. Tenny & J. Pustejovsky (Eds.), Events as grammatical objects (pp. 39-96). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Filip, H. & Carlson, G.. (2001). Distributivity strengthens reciprocity, collectivity weakens it. Linguistics and Philosophy 24,417-466.

Fleischman, S. (1990). Tense and narrativity. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Fleischman, S. (1991). Verb tense and point of view in narrative. In S. Fleischman & L. R. Waugh (Eds.) Discourse-pragmatics and the verb (pp. 26-54). London: Routledge.

Fleischman, S. (1995). Imperfective and irrealis. In J. Bybee & S. Fleischman (Eds.) Modality in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Fodor, J. (1970). Three reasons for not deriving 'kill' from 'cause to die'. Linguistic Inquiry, 1,29-38.

Folli, R. (2002). Constructing telicity in English and Italian. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oxford.

Folli, R. & Harley, H. (2002). On syntactic and semantic boundedness: Threshhold vs. endpoint sub-events. Paper presented at the University of Konstanz Workshop on Complex Predicates, Particles and Subevents, Konstanz, Germany.

Folli, R. & Harley, H. (2004). On obligatory obligation: The composition of Italian causatives. In A. Castro, et al. (Eds.), MITWPL 47: Romance, Op. 47 (pp. 87- 113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.

Folli, R. & Ramchand, G. (2001). Getting results: Motion constructions in Italian and Scottish Gaelic. Proceedings of WCCFL 20, 101-1 14.

Forsyth, J. (1970). A grammar of aspect, usage and meaning in the Russian verb. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Fox, D. (2000), Economy and semantic interpretation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Frege, G. (1950). The foundation of arithmetic. Oxford: Blackwell. [originally

published 18841

Gagarina, N. (2000). The acquisition of aspectuality by Russian children: the early stages. ZAS Papers in Linguistics (pp. 232-246). Berlin: Zentrum f~ Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft.

Galton, A. (1984). The logic of aspect: An axiomatic approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Garcia Fernandez, L. (1999). Sobre la naturaleza de la oposicion entre prettrito imperfect0 y prettrito perfecto simple. Linguistica Espafiola Actual, 21, 169- 188.

Garcia, E. C. & v. Putte, F. C. M. (l988). The value of contrast: Contrasting the value of strategies. IRAL, 26, 263-280.

Garey, H. (1957). Verbal aspect in French. Language 33, 91-1 10. Gavruseva, E. (2000). Aspect parameter in the guise of optional infinitives in child

L2 English. Proceedings of BUCLD 24, 319-330. Gavruseva, E. (2003). Aktionsart, aspect and the acquisition of finiteness in early

grammar. Linguistics 4, 723-755. Giacalone Ramat, A. (1992). Grammaticalization processes in the area of temporal

and modal relations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14,297-322. Giacalone Ramat, A. (1995). Tense and aspect in learner Italian. In P. M. Bertinetto,

V. Bianchi, 0. Dahl & M. Squartini (Eds.), Temporal reference: Aspect and actionality: Vol. 2. Typological Perspectives (pp. 289-309). Turin, Italy: Rosenberg & Sellier.

Giacalone Rarnat, A. (1997). Progressive periphrases, markedness and second language data. In S. Eliasson & E.H. Jahr (Eds.) Language and its ecology: Essays in memory of Einar Haugen (pp. 261-285). Berlin: Mouton.

Giacalone Ramat, A. (2002). How do learners acquire the classical three categories of temporality? Evidence from L2 Italian. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.), Tense-aspect morphology in L2 acquisition (pp. 221-247). Amsterdam: John Benj amins.

Giacalone Ramat, A. & Banfi, E. (1990). The acquisition of temporality: A second language perspective. Folia Linguistica, XXIV, 405-428.

Giorgi, A. & Pianesi, F. (1997). Tense and aspect: from semantics to morphosyntax. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Giorgi, A. & Pianesi, F. (2000). Sequence of tense phenomena in Italian. Probus, 12, 1-32.

Giorgi, A. & Pianesi, F. (2002). Present tense, perfectivity and the anchoring conditions. Unpublished manuscript, University of Bergamo and Istituto per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica.

Givon, T. (1987). Beyond foreground and background. In R. Tornlin (ed), Coherence and grounding in discourse (pp. 175-188) Amsterdam: John Benj amins.

Gleitman, L. (1991). The structural sources of verb meanings. Language Acquisition 1, 3-56.

Glovinskaja, M. J. (1982). Semanticeskie tipy vidovyx protivopostavlenij russkogo glagola [Semantic types of aspectual oppositions of Russian verbs]. Moscow: Nauka.

Godfiey, D. L. (1980). A discourse analysis of tense in adult ESL monologues. In D. Larsen-Freeman (Ed.), Discourse analysis in second language research (pp. 92-1 10). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Gosselin, L. (1999). Les valeurs de l'imparfait et du conditionnel dans les systemes hypothktiques. In S. Vogeleer, A. Borillo, M. Vuillaume & C.Vetters (Eds.), Cahiers Chronos 4,29-52.

Greuder, W. & Butt, M. (1998). The Projection ofArguments. Stanford: CSLI. Grevisse, M. (1980). Le Bon Usage. Paris-Gembloux: ~di t ions Duculot,. Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press. Grirnshaw, J. (1991) Extended projections. Unpublished manuscript, Rutgers

University. Groenendijk, J. & Stockhof, M. (1982). Semantic analysis of wh-complements.

Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, (2), 175-233. Gruber, J. (1965) Studies in lexical relations. Bloomington: Indiana University

Linguistics Club. Guasti, M. T. (1994). Verb syntax ih Italian child gammer: Finite and nonfinite

verbs. Language Acquisition, 3, 1-40. Guentcheva, Z. (1996). L 'knonciation mkdiatiske. LouvainIParis: Peeters. GuCron, J. (1999). On the syntactic domains of temporal interpretation. In M.

Coene, et al. (Eds.), Traiani Augusti Vestigia Pressa Sequamur: Studia Linguistics in Honorem Lilianae Tasmowski (pp. 41 1-428). Padova: Unipress.

Guillaume, G. (1929). Temps et verbe. Paris: Champion. Haik, I. (1989). Telling tell. Unpublished manuscript, McGill University. Haines, D. (2002). An analysis of a cloze and of the aspect and discourse

hypotheses through a written and oral sample of a retell based on the film The Lord of the Rings. Unpublished course paper, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec.

Hale, K. (1984). Notes on world view and semantic categories: Some Warlpiri examples. In P. Muysken & H. van Riemsdijk (Eds.), Features and projections (pp. 233-254). Dordrecht: Foris.

Hale, K. & Keyser, S. J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical representation of semantic relations. In S. J. Keyser & K. Hale (Eds), The view @om Building 20 (pp. 53-109). Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

Hale, K. &. Keyser, S. J. 1998. The basic elements of argument structure. In H. Harley (Ed.), MITWPL 32: Papers from the UPenn/MIT round table on argument structure and aspect (pp. 73-1 18). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.

Halle, M. & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In S. J. Keyser & K. Hale (Eds), The view from Building 20 (pp. 1 1 1 - 176). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Harley, B. (1992). Patterns of second language development in French immersion. Journal of French Language Studies, 2, 159-1 83.

Harley, B. & Swain, M. (1978). An analysis of the verb system used by young learners of French. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 3, 35-79.

Harley, H. (1995). Subjects, events and licencing. PhD dissertation, MIT.

Harley, H. (1998). Aspects of have. In J. GuCron & A. Zribi-Hertz (Eds.), La grammaire de la possession (pp. 195-226). Paris: UniversitC de Paris VII.

Harley, H. (1999). Denominal verbs and aktionsart. In L. Pylkkanen & A. van Hout (Eds.), MITWPL 35: Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on the Lexicon (pp. 73-85). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.

Harley, H. (2001). How do verbs get their names? The aktionsart of denominal verbs and the ontology of verb roots in English. Paper presented at the Syntax of Aspect workshop, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel. Handout available online at http//www.arizona.edu/-ling/hh/PDFs/ HarleyRootsIsrae1200 1 .pdf

Harley, H. (2002). A Minimal(ish) linking theory. Paper presented at the Maryland Minimalist Mayfest.

Harley, H. & Noyer, R. (1998a). Licensing in the non-lexicalist lexicon: nominalizations, vocabulary items and the Encyclopaedia. In H. Harley (Ed.) MITWPL 32: Papers ji-om the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on Argument Structure and Aspect (pp. 119-137). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.

Harley, H. & Noyer, R. (1998b). Mixed nominalizations, short verb movement, and object shift in English. In P. N. Tamanji & K. Kusumoto (Eds.), Proceedings 0fNELS 28, 143-157

Harley, H. & Noyer, R. (2000). Formal vs. encyclopedic properties of vocabulary: Evidence from nominalisations. In B. Peeters (Ed.), The lexicon-encyclopedia interface (pp. 349-374). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Harley, H. & Ritter, E. (2002). Person and number in pronouns: A feature- geometric analysis. Language, 78,482-526.

Hasbun, L. (1995). The role of lexical aspect in the acquisition of tense and grammatical aspect in Spanish as a foreign language. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.

Hay, J., Kennedy, C. & Levin, B. (1999). Scalar structure underlies telicity in 'degree achievements'. Proceedings of SALT IX, pp. 127-144.

Haznedar, B. (2001). The acquisition of the IP system in child L2 English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, .23, 1-39.

Haznedar, B. & Schwartz, B. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? Proceedings of BUCLD 21, 257-268.

Higginbotham, J. (1997). Location and causation. Unpublished manuscript, University of Oxford.

Higginbotham, J. (2000a). On events in linguistic semantics. In J. Higginbotham et al. (Eds), Speaking of events (pp. 49-80). New YorklOxford: Oxford University Press.

Higginbotham, J. (2000b). Accomplishments. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California and Oxford University.

Higginbotham, J. (2000~). On the representation of telicity. Unpublished manuscript, University of Oxford.

Higginbotham, J., Pianesi, F. & Varzi, A. (Eds.) (2000). Speaking of events. New YorkIOxford: Oxford University Press.

Hinrichs, E. (1986). Temporal anaphora in discourses of English. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 63-82.

Hirst, W. & Weil, J. (1982). Acquisition of epistemic and deontic meaning of modals. Journal of Child Language, 9, 659-666.

Hoekstra, T. (1984). Transitivity: Grammatical relations in government and binding the0 ry. Dordrecht: Foris.

Hoekstra, T. (1988). Small clause results. Lingua, 74, 101 -139. Hoekstra, T. (1992). Aspect and theta theory. In I. Roca (Ed.), Thematic structure:

Its role in grammar (pp. 145-174). BerldNew York: Foris. Hoekstra, T. (1999). Auxiliary selection in Dutch. Natural Language and

Linguistic Theory 17, 67-84. Hoekstra, T. & Hyams, N. (1998). Aspects of root infinitives. Lingua, 106,91-112. Hoekstra, T. & Jordens, P. (1994). From adjunct to head. In T. Hoekstra & B.

Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 1 19- 149). Amsterdam: John Benjarnins.

Hoekstra, T. & Mulder, R. (1990). Unergatives as copular verbs: Locational and existential predication. The Linguistic Review 7, 1-79.

Hollebrandse, B. & van Hout, A. (2001). On the acquisition of the aspects in Italian. In J.-Y. Kim & A. Werle (Eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 25: The proceedings of SULA: The semantics of underrepresented languages in the Americas (pp. 11 1-120). Amherst, MA: GLSA.

Holmberg, A. (1986). Word order and syntactic features in the Scandinavian languages and English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Stockholm.

Hope, E. (1974). The deep syntax of Lisu sentences: A transformational case grammar. PacEfic Linguistics Series B No. 34 (The Australian National University).

Hopper, P. J. (1979). Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In T. Giv6n (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Discourse and syntax (pp. 213-241). New York: Academic Press.

Hornstein, N. (1990). As time goes by: Tense and Universal Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hovav, M. R. & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97-134). Stanford: CLSI.

Huang, J. (1982). Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. PhD dissertation, MIT.

Hyams, N. & Wexler, K. (1993). On the grammatical basis of null subjects in child language. Linguistic Inquiry, 24,42 1-459.

Hyams, N. (1983). The acquisition of parameterized grammar. Ph.D. dissertation, City University of New York Graduate Center.

Hyams, N. (2001). Now you hear it, now you don't: The nature of optionality in child grammar. Proceedings of BUCLD 25 (I), 34-58.

Hyams, N. (2002). Clausal structure in child Greek: A reply to Varlokosta, Vainikka and Rohrbacher and a reanalysis. The Linguistic Review, 19, 257-300.

Iatridou, S. (2000). The grammatical ingredients of counterfactuality. Linguistic

Inquiry, 3l ,23 1-270. Ingram, D. & Thompson, W. (1996). Early syntactic acquisition in German:

evidence for the modal hypothesis. Language, 72,97-120. Isacenko, A. V. (1960). Grammaticeskij stroj russkogo jazyka v sopostavlenii s

slovackim. Cast' 2-aja: Morfologija [The grammar of Russian in comparison with Slovak. Part 2: Morphology]. Bratislava: Izdatel'stvo slovackoj Akademii Nauk.

Izvorski, R. (1997). The present perfect as an epistemic modal. Proceedings of the SALT VII, 222-239.

Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Jackendoff, R. (1996). The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and perhaps

even quantification in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 14, 305-54.

Jacobson, P. (1992). Raising without movement. In R. K. Larson et al. (Eds.), Control and grammar (pp. 149-1 94). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Jayez, J. & Rossari, C. (1998). Pragmatic connectives as predicates. The case of inferential connectives. In P. Saint-Dizier (Ed.), Predicative forms in natural language and in lexical knowledge bases (pp. 285-319). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Jayez, J. (2002). Le point de w e de l'imparfait. Paper presented at the Colloquium on the formal semantics of tense & aspect, University of Paris 7.

Jespersen, 0 . (1931). A modern English grammar on historicalprinciples, Book IV: Syntax. London: George Allen and Unwin

Johnson, K. (1990). On the syntax of inflectional paradigms. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin.

Johnson, K. (1991). object positions,. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 9, 577-636.

Jourdenais, R. (1998). The effects of textual enhancement on the acquisition of the Spanish preterit and imperfect. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgetown University.

Julien, M. (2001). The syntax of complex tenses. The Linguistic Review, 18, 125- 167.

Kamp, H. & Reyle, U. (1993). From discourse to logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Kamp, H. & Rohrer, C. (1983). Tense in text. In S. Baiierle & A. von Stechow

(Eds .), Meaning, use and interpretation of language (pp. 250-269). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Kamp, H. (1981). ~vbnements, reprtsentations discursives et rkftrence temporelle. Langages, 64,39-64.

Katis, D. (1984). The acquisition of modem Greek verbs with special reference to the imperfect past and perfect clauses. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Reading.

Kayne, R. (1985). Principles of particle constructions. In H. Obenauer et a1 (Eds.), Levels of syntactic representation (pp. 101-140). Dordrecht: Foris.

Kayne. R. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kazanina, N. & Phillips, C. (2003). Russian children's knowledge of aspectual

distinctions. Proceedings of BUCLD 27, 390-401. Kennedy, C. & Levin, B. (2002). Telicity corresponds to degree of change.

Unpublished manuscript, Northwestern University and Stanford University. Kennedy, C. &. McNally, L. (1999a). From event structure to scale structure:

degree modification in deverbal adjectives. Proceedings of Salt IX, 163-1 80. Kennedy, C. & McNally, L. (1999b). Degree modification and the scalar structure

of gradable adjectives. Proceedings of TALN'99,98-107. Kenny, A. (1963). Action, emotion and will. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Kihlstedt, M. (2002). Reference to past events in dialogue: The acquisition of tense

and aspect by advanced learners of French. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.), Tense-aspect morphology in L2 acquisition (pp. 323-361). Amsterdam: John Benj arnins.

Kiparsky, P. (1998). Partitive case and aspect. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 265-307). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Kiparsky, P. (2001). Structural case in Finnish. Lingua, I l l , 315-376. Kipka, P. (1990). Slavic aspect and its implications. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Klein, S. (1982). Syntactic theory and the developing grammar: Reestablishing the

relationship between linguistic theory and data from language acquisition. Ph.D dissertation, University of California-Los Angeles.

Klein, W. (1995). A time-relational analysis of Russian aspect. Language, 71, 669- 695.

Klein, W. (2000). An analysis of the Germanperfekt. Language, 76, 358-382. Kooprnan, H. (2000). Prepositions, postpositions, circumpositions, and particles. In

The syntax of speczfiers and heads: Collected essays of Hilda J. Koopman. London: Routledge.

Kozlowska-Macgregor, M. (2002). The state of near-native grammar: A study of aspect in L2 Polish. PhD dissertation, McGill University.

Kozlowska-Macgregor, M. (2002). The nature of 'incompleteness' of the end-state grammar. Paper given at GASLA 2002, University of Ottawa.

Kramer, I. (1993). The licensing of subjects in early child language. MIT Working Papers in Linguisitics, 19, 197-2 12.

Kramer, I. (2000). Interpreting indefinites: An experimental study of children's language comprehension. Ph.D. dissertation, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics and University of Utrecht.

Kratzer, A. (1989). Stage-level and individual-level predicates. In E. Bach, A. Kratzer & B. Partee (Eds.), Papers on quantzjkation. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.

Kratzer, A. (1995). Stage level and individual level predicates. In G. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier (Eds.), The generic book (pp. 125-175). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Kratzer, A. (1996). Severing the external argument from its verb. In J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (Eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon (pp. 109-137). Dordrecht, Kluwer.

Kratzer, A. (1998). Adjectival passives. Unpublished manuscript, University of

Massachusetts. Krifka, M. (1998). The origins of telicity. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Events and

grammar (pp. 197-236). ~ordrecht: Kluwer. Krifka, M. (1989). Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in

event semantics. In R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem & P. van Emde Boas (Eds.), Semantics and contextual expression (pp. 75-1 15). Dordrecht: Foris.

Krifka, M. (1990). 4000 shps passed through the lock. Linguistics and Philosophy, 13, 487-520.

Krifka, M. (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In I. Sag & A. Szabolsci (Eds.), Lexical matters (pp. 29- 54). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Krifka, M. et al. (1995). Genericity: An introduction. In G. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier (Eds.), The generic book (pp. 1-124). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuczaj, S. & Maratsos, M. (1975). What children can say before they will. Merrill- Palmer Quarterly, 21, 89-1 1 1.

Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city. Phdadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Labov, W. & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts (pp. 12-44). Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Laca, B. (2002). L'aspect est-il rkcursif? A propos du 'Progressif dans les langues romanes. Paper presented at the ~ o l l o ~ u i u m on the formal semantics of tense & aspect, University of Paris 7.

Lafford, B. A. (1996). The development of tenselaspect relations in L2 Spanish narratives: Evidence to test competing theories. Paper presented at the Second Language Research Forum, University of Arizona.

Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in 'fossilized' steady state. Second Language Research, 14,359-375.

Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335- 391.

Larson, R. (1991). Some issues in verb serialization. In C. Lefebvre (Ed.), Serial verbs: Grammatical, comparative, and cognitive approaches (pp. 185-21 1). Amsterdam: John Benjarnins.

Lascarides, A. (1991). The progressive and the imperfective paradox. Synthese, 87, 401-447.

Lascarides, A. & Asher, N. (1993). Temporal interpretation, discourse relations, and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16,437-493.

Lascarides, A. & Asher, N. (1999). Cognitive states, discourse structure and the content of dialogue. Proceedings of Amstelogue 1999, 1 - 12.

Lascarides, A. & Copestake, A. (1999). Default representation in constraint-based frameworks. Computational ~iniuistics, 14, 1-52.

Lasnik, H. (2001) Subjects, objects, and the EPP. In W. D. Davies & S. Dubinsky (Eds.), Objects and other subjects: Grammatical functions, functional categories and configurationality (pp. 103-121). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Lasser, I. (1997). Finiteness in adult and child German. Wageningen, the

Netherlands: Posnene and Looijen bv. Leeman, D. (2001). Pourquoi ne peut-on combiner 'si' et le conditionnel?. In P.

Dendale, & L. Tasmowski (Eds.), Le conditionnel en franpis (pp. 211-230). Paris: Klincksieck.

Leeman, J., Arteagoitia, I., Fridman, B. & Doughty, C. (1995). Integrating attention to form with meaning: Focus on form in content-based Spanish instruction. In R. Schrmdt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 217-258). Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.

Levin, B. & Hovav Rappaport, M. (2001). An event structure account of English resultatives. Language, 77, 766-797.

Levin, B. & Rapoport, T. R. (1988). Lexical subordination. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistics Society 24, 275-289.

Levinson, S. (197911992) Activity types in language. Linguistics, 17, 356-99. Li, C. N. & Thompson, S. A. (1976). Subject and topic: A new typology of

language. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 457-489). New York: Academic Press.

Li, C. N. &. Thompson, S. A. (198.1). Mandarin Cinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Li, P. & Shirai, Y. (2000). The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Li, Y.-H. A. (1998). Argument determiner phrases and number phrases. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 693-702.

Lidz, J. (1999). Causativity, late insertion and vP. In L. Pylkkanen & A. van Hout (Eds.), MITWPL 35: Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on the Lexicon (pp. 117-136). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.

Lieber, R. (1993). Deconstructing morphology: Word formation in syntactic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretic approach. In R. Bauerle, C. Schwarze & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Meaning, use and interpretation of language (pp. 303-323). Berlin: De Gruyter.

Link, G. (1987). Algebraic semantics of event structures. In J. Groenendijk et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Amsterdam Colloquium (pp. 243-262). Amsterdam: ITLI.

Link, G. (1998). Algebraic semantics in language and philosophy. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Linn, M. S. (2001). A grammar of Euchee (Yuchi). Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas.

Linn, M. S. & Rosen, S. T. (2001). The functional projections of subject splits. Proceedings of the 2001 Texas Linguistics Society Meeting, 135-1 52.

Liskin-Gasparro, J. (1996). Narrative strategies: A case study of developing story- telling skills by a learner of Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 80,271-286.

Liskin-Gasparro, J . (2000). The acquisition of temporal expression in Spanish oral narratives: Exploring learners' perceptions. Hispania, 83, 830-844.

Lujan, M. (1981). The Spanish copulas as aspectual indicators. Lingua, 54,165-2 10.

Lunn, P. V. (1985). The aspectual lens. Hispanic Linguistics, 2,49-61. Lyons, J . (1977). Semantics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mackenzie, I. (1999). Semantics of Spanish verbal categories. Bern: Lang. MacWhinney, B. & Snow, C. (1985). The child language data exchange system.

Journal of Child Language, 12,271-296. Madsen, S. & Gilkerson, J. (1999). A.pattern of differences between bare forms and

root infinitives. Unpublished manuscript, University of California-Los Angeles. Manzini, M. R. & Savoia, L. M. (1998). Clitics and auxiliary choice in Italian

dialects: Their relevance for the person ergativity split. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes, 27, 1 15-138.

Manzini, M. R. (1986). Restructuring and reanalysis. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Marantz, A. (1984). On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press. Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the

privacy of your own lexicon. In A. Dirnitriadis & L. Siegel, (Eds.), University of Pennsylvania Working Papers'in Linguistics, 42 (pp. 201-225). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.

Marantz, A. (2001). Words. Unpublished manuscript, MIT. Martin, R. (1983). Pour une logique du sens. Paris: Presses Universitaires de

France. Maslov, Y. S. (1948). Vid i leksiceskoe znacenie glagola v sovremennom russkom

literaturnom jazyke [Aspect and lexical meaning of the verb in Modem Literary Russian]. Izvestija Akademii Nauk SSSR, Otdel literatury i jazyka 7(4), 303- 316.

Maslov, Y. S. (1974). Zur Semantik der Perfektivitatsopposition. Wiener Sla- vistisches Jahrbuch, 20, 107-22.

Mateu Fontanals, J. (2000). Unselected objects in complex predicates. Paper presented at the DGfS 2000 meeting, Marburg, Germany.

McCawley, J. D. (1968). The role of semantics in a grammar. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.) Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 124-169). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

McConnell-Ginet, S. (1982). Adverbs and logical form. Language, 58, 144- 184. Mehlig, H. R. (1996). Some analogies between the morphology of nouns and the

morphology of aspect in Russian. Folia Linguistics, 30, 87-109. Meisel, J. R. (1990). Inflection, subjects and subject verb agreement. In J. R. Meisel

(Ed.), Two first languages: Early grammatical development in bilingual children (pp. 237-300). Dordrecht: Foris.

Mithun, M. (1991). Activelagentive case marlung and its motivations. Language, 67, 5 10-546.

Moens, M. (1987). Tense, aspect, and temporal reference. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh.

Moens, M. & Steedman, M. (1988). Temporal ontology and temporal reference. Computational Linguistics, 14 (2), 15-28.

Montrul, S. & Slabakova, R. (2002.). Acquiring morphosyntactic and semantic properties of preterit and imperfect tenses in L2 Spanish. In A.-T. Perez-Leroux

& J. Liceras (Eds.), The acquisition of Spanish morphosyntax: The LI-L2 Connection (pp. 113-149). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Montrul, S. & Slabakova, R. (2003). Competence similarities between native and near native speakers: An investigation of the preteritelimperfect contrast in Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 35 1-398

Morris, W. (1978). The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

Miiller, C. (1974). Les verbes les plus frequents du franqais. Le Franpis duns le monde, 103, 14-17.

Mum, A. & Schrnitt, C. (in press) Number and indefinites. Lingua. Murornatsu, K. (1998). On the syntax of classifiers. Ph.D. dissertation, University of

Maryland. Napoli, D. J. (1992). Secondary resultative predicates in Italian. Journal of

Linguistics, 28, 53-90. Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle and

Heinle. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press. Nilsen, 0. (1998). The syntax of circumstantial adverbials. M.A. thesis, University

of Tromsnr. Noyau, C. (1984). The development of means for temporality in French by adult

Spanish-speakers: Linguistic devices and communicative capacities. In G. Extra & M. Mittner (Eds.), studies in second language acquisition by adult immigrants: Proceedings of the ESF/AILA symposium (pp.113-137). Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University, Department of Language and Literature.

Noyau, C. (1990). The development of means for temporality in the unguided acquisition of L2: Crosslinguistic perspectives. In H. W. Dechert (Ed.), Current trends in European second language acquisition research (pp. 143-170). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Noyau, C., HoudaTfa, E., Vasseur, M. & VCronique, D. (1995). The acquisition of French. In R. Dietrich, W. Klein & C. Noyau (Eds.), The acquisition of temporality in a second language (pp. 145-209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Nunes, J. & Uriagereka, J. (2000). Cyclicity and extraction domains. Syntax, 3, 20- 43.

O'Brian E., Folli, R., Harley, H. & Bever, T. G. (2002). Event structure precedes argument structure during comprehension. Unpublished manuscript, University of Arizona.

Ogihara, T. (1989). Temporal reference in English and Japanese, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.

Olsen, M. B. & Weinberg, A. (1999). Innateness and the acquisition of gram- matical aspect via lexical aspect. Proceedings of BUCLD 23, 529-540.

Paduceva, E. V. (1990). Vid i leksicheskie znachenia glagola [Aspect and lexical meanings of the verb]. Russian Linguistics, 14, 1 - 18.

Palmer, F. R. (2001). Mood and modality. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, M A : MIT Press

Partee, B. (1984). Nominal and temporal anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy, 7,243-286.

Partee, B. (1973). Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. The Journal of Philosophy, 70, 601-609.

Pereltsvaig, A. (2000). On accusative adverbials in Russian and Finnish. In A. Alexiadou & P. Svenonius (Eds.) Linguistics in Potsdam 6: Adverbs and adjunction (pp. 155-176). Potsdam: University of Potsdam.

Pereltsvaig, A. (2003). The role of L2 in L1 loss of aspect in Diaspora Russian. Paper presented at the LSA Annual Meeting, Atlanta.

Pereltsvaig, A. (to appear a). What does American Russian morphology tell us about syntax? Journal of Slavic Linguistics.

Pereltsvaig, A. (to appear b). Agreement in the absence of Agreement: A case study of gender agreement in American Russian. Cahiers Linguistique d'ottawa.

Pereltsvaig, A. & Polinsky, M. (2001). Lexical access and the notion of default in L1 attrition. Unpublished manuscript, University of Tromser and University of California-San Diego.

Perlrnutter, D. (1978). Impersonal. passive and the unaccusative hypothesis. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 157-189.

Perlmutter, D. & Postal, P. M. (1984). The 1-Advancement Exclusiveness Law. In D. Perlmutter & C. Rosen (Eds.), Studies in relational grammar 11 (pp. 30-80). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Pesetsky, D. & Torrego, E. (2001). T-to-C movement: causes and consequences. In Kenstowicz, M. (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 355-426). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Pesetsky, D. (1982). Paths and categories. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Peterson, P. (1997). Fact, proposition, event. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Phillips, V. (1996). Up-rooting the prefix maha- in Malagasy. M.A. thesis, McGill

University. Phdlips, V. (2000). The interactions between prefix and root: the case of maha- in

Malagasy. In V. Phillips, I. Paul & L. Travis (Eds.), Formal issues in Austronesian linguistics (pp. 85-104). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Piiion, C. J. (1993). Aspectual composition and the 'pofective' in Polish. Paper presented at Slavic Linguistics Workshop, MIT.

Piiion, C. J. (1994). Nominal reference and the imperfective in Polish and English. Proceedings of NELS 24 ,383-397.

Piiion, C. J. (1995). Accumulation and aspectuality in Polish. Proceedings of NELS 25, 491-506.

Piiion, C. J. (1999). Durative adverbials for result states. Proceedings of WCCFL 18, 420-433.

Platzack, C. (1979). The semantic interpretation of aspect and aktionsarten.

Dordrecht: Foris. Plunkett, K. & Stromqvist, S. (1990). The acquisition of Scandinavian languages.

Gothenberg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics 59. Gothenberg, Sweden: University of Gothenberg.

Poeppel, D. & Wexler, K. (1993). The full competence hypothesis of clause structure in early German. Language, 69, 1-33.

Polinsky, M. (1994). What happens when you lose aspect: American Russian. Paper presented at the UCLA Symposium on Aspect.

Polinsky, M. (1996). American ~ussian: An endangered language? Unpublished manuscript, University of California, San Diego. http://ling.ucsd.edu/ -polinsky/index. html.

Polinsky, M. (1997). American Russian: Language loss meets language acquisition. In W. Browne, E. Dornisch, N. Kondrashova & D. Zec (Eds.), Annual Work- shop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (pp. 370-406). Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publishers.

Polinsky, M. (1998). A composite linguistic profile of a speaker of Russian in the U.S. In 0 . Kagan & B. Riflrin (Eds.), The learning and teaching of Slavic languages and cultures (pp. 437-465). Bloomington, IN: Slavica.

Polinsky, M. (2002). Structure mapping in incomplete acquisition. Unpublished manuscript, University of California-San Diego.

Pollock, J-Y. (1989). Verb movement, Universal Grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 365-424.

Portner, P. & Yabushita, K. (1998). The semantics and pragmatics of topic phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, 1 17-1 57.

PrCvost, P. & White, L. (2000). Accounting for morphological variation in L2 acquisition: Truncation or missing inflection? In M. A. Friedmann & L. Rizzi (Eds.), The acquisition of syntax: Studies in comparative developmental linguistics (pp. 202-235). London: Longman.

Progovac, L. (2001). Clausal functional projections in Serbian. In S. Franks, T. Holloway-King, & M. Yardoff (Eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 9: The Bloomington Meeting 2000 (pp. 229-257). Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.

Progovac, L. (2002). Aspect Phrases, perfective prefixes and congruent Pre- positional Phrases in Serbian. In J. Toman (ed) Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 10: The Second Ann Arbor Meeting 2001 (pp. 201 -22 1). Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.

Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Ramchand, G. (1997). Aspect and predication: The semantics of argument

structure. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ramchand, G. (2002). Aktionsart, 1-syntax and selection. In H. Verkuyl et al. (Eds.),

Proceedings of Perspectives on Aspect Conference (pp. 1-14). Utrecht: OTS. Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of symbolic logic. New York: The Free Press. Rice, K. (2000). Morpheme order and semantic scope: Word formation in the

Athapaskan verb. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Ritter, E. (1991). Two functional categories in Noun Phrases: Evidence from

Modem Hebrew. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 25: Perspectives on phrase structure (pp. 37-62). New York: Academic Press.

Ritter, E. (1995). On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 13, 355-404.

Ritter, E. & Rosen, S. T. (1993). Deriving causation. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 11, 5 19-556.

Ritter, E. & Rosen, S. T. (1998). Delimiting events in syntax. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 135-164). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Ritter, E. & Rosen, S. T. (2000). Event structure and ergativity. In C. Tenny & J. Pustejovsky (Eds.), Events as grammatical objects (pp. 187-238). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Ritter, E. & Rosen, S. T. (2001). The interpretive value of object splits, Language Sciences, 23,425-45 1.

Rizzi, L. (1994). Early null subjects. and root null subjects. In B. Schwartz & T. Hoekstra (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 153- 176). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Rizzi, L. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of grammar (pp. 281-337), Dordrecht : Kluwer.

Rosen, S. T. (1984). The interface between semantic roles and initial grammatical relations. In D. Perlmutter & C. Rosen (Eds.), Studies in Relational Grammar (pp. 38-77). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rothstein, S. (Ed.) (1998). Events and grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Rothstein, S. (1999). Fine-grained structure in the eventuality domain: The

semantics of predicate adjective phrases and 'be'. Natural Language Semantics, 7, 347-420.

Rothstein, S. (2000). Incrementality and the structure of accomplishments. Paper presented at the International Roundtable on 'The Syntax of Tense and Aspect', Universitt de Paris. Abstract: http://www.llf.cnrs.fi/TA/rothstein.htrn.

Rothstein, S. (2000). What are incremental themes? Unpublished manuscript, Bar- Ilan University.

Roussakova, M., Sai, S., Bogomolova, S., Guerassimov, D., Tangisheva, T. & Zaika, N. (2001). On the mental representation of Russian aspect relations. In S. Bendjaballah, et al. (Eds.), Morphology 2000. Selected papers from the 9th Morphology Meeting (pp. 305-3 12). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Roussarie, L. & Amsili, P. (2002). Discours et compositionalitt. To appear in Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference for Natural Language Processing.

Roussou, A. (2000). On the left periphery: Modal particles and complementisers. Journal of Greek Linguistics, 1, 65-94.

Salaberry, R. (1998). The development of aspectual distinctions in academic L2 French. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 508-542.

Salaberry, R. (1999). The development of past tense verbal morphology in classroom L2 Spanish. Applied Linguistics, 20, 15 1- 178.

Salaberry, R. (2000). The development of past tense morphology in L2 Spanish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Salabeny, R. (2002). Tense and aspect in the selection of Spanish past tense verbal morphology. In R. Salabeny & Y. Shirai (Eds.), Tense-aspect morphology in L2 acquisition (pp.397-415). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Salabeny, R. (2003). Tense aspect in verbal morphology. Hispania, 86, 559-573. Sanz, M. (2000). Events and predication: A new approach to syntactic processing

in English and Spanish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Saussure (de), L. & Stiouhl, B. (2002). Imparfait et enrichissement pragmatique. To

appear in P. Larrivte & E. Labeau (Eds.), Cahiers Chronos: Nouveaux de'veloppements de l'imparfait.

Schein, B. (2002). Events and the semantic content of thematic relations. In G. Preyer & G. Peter (Eds.), Logical form and language (pp. 263-344). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Schiffrin, D. (1981). Tense variation in narrative. Language, 57,45-62. Schlyter, S. (1990). The acquisition of French temporal morphemes in adults and in

bilingual children. In G. Bernini & A. Giacalone Ramat (Eds.), La temporalita nell'acquisizione di lingue seconde (pp. 293-308). Milan: Franco Angeli.

Schmitt, C. (1992). Ser and estar: a matter of aspect. Proceedings of NELS 22,411- 425.

Schrmtt, C. (1996). Aspect and the syntax of Noun Phrases. Ph.D. dissertation University of Maryland.

Schrnitt, C. (1999). When stay and become are the same verb: the case officar. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 1, 227-255.

Schrmtt, C. (2001a). Syntactic constraints on access to lexical structure: the case of $car. In J. Camps & C. Wiltshire (Eds.), Romance syntax, semantics and their L2 acquisition.(pp. 21 1-225). Amsterdam: John Benjarnins.

Schmitt, C. (2001b). Cross-linguistic variation and the present perfect: The case of Portuguese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 19,403-453.

Schmitt, E. (2000). The lost word: Language attrition among children. Proceedings of BUCLD 24, 645-656.

Schoorlemmer, M. (1995). Participial passive and Aspect in Russian. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utrecht.

Schoorlemmer, M. (2004). Syntactic unaccusativity in Russian. In A. Alexiadou, E. Anagnostopoulou & M. Everaert (Eds.), The unaccusativity puzzle (pp. 207- 242). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schiitze, C. (2001). Semantically empty lexical heads as last resort. In N. Corver & H. van Riemsdick (Eds). Semi-lexical categories: On the function of content words and the content of function words (pp. 127-187). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge, U K : Cambridge University Press. Shaer, B. (1996). Making sense of tense: Tense, time reference, and linking theory.

Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University. Sharoff, S. (2002). The list of most frequent Russian words. http://www.

artint.ru/projects/frqlist/frqlist-en asp Shi, D. (2000). Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese.

Language, 76,383-408.

Shirai, Y. (1991). Primacy of aspect in language acquisition: Simplified input and prototype. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California-Los Angeles.

Shirai, Y. (2002a). The prototype hypothesis of tense-aspect acquisition in second language. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.), Tense-aspect morphology in L2 acquisition (pp. 455-478). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Shirai, Y. (2002b). The Aspect Hypothesis in SLA and the acquisition of Japanese. Acquisition of Japanese as a Second Language, 5, 42-61.

Shirai, Y. & Andersen, R. W. (1995). The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: a prototype account. Language, 71,743-762.

Shirai, Y. & Kurono, A. (1998). The acquisition of tense-aspect marking in Japanese as a second language. Language Learning, 48, 245-279.Shirai, Y., Slobin, D. & Weist, R. (1998). Introduction to the acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. First Language, 54, 245-253.

Siewierska, A. (1991). Functional grammar. London: Routledge. Silva-Corvalan, C. (1983). Tense and aspect in oral Spanish narrative: Context and

meaning. Language, 59, 760-780. Silverstein, M. (1976). Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In R. M. W. Dixon

(Ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages (pp. 112-171). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

Slabakova, R. (1996). Bulgarian aspect in phrase structure. Proceedings of WCCFL 15, 487-503.

Slabakova, R. (1997a). Bulgarian preverbs: Aspect in phrase structure. Linguistics, 35, 673-704.

Slabakova, R. (1997b). Zero acquisition: Second language acquisition of the parameter of aspect. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University.

Slabakova, R. (2001). Telicity in the second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Slabakova, R. (2002) Recent research on the acquisition of aspect: an embar-

rassment of riches? Second Language Research, 18, 172-1 88. Slabakova, R. & Montrul, S. (2002). o n viewpoint aspect and its L2 acquisition: A

UG perspective. In R. Salabeny & Y. Shirai (Eds.), Tense-aspect morphology in L2 acquisition (pp. 363-395). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Slabakova, R. & Montrul, S. (2003). Genericity and aspect in L2 acquisition, Language Acquisition, 11, 165- 196.

Smith, C.S. (1983). A theory of aspectual choice. Language, 59,479-501. Smith, C.S. (1986). A speaker-based approach to aspect. Linguistics and Phi-

losophy, 9, 97-1 15. Smith, C.S. (1991). The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer. [2nd edition

1997.1 Smith, C. S. (1999). Activities: States or events? Linguistics and Philosophy, 22,

479-508. Smith, C.S. (2003). Modes of discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press. Snyder, W. (1995). A Neo-Davidsonian approach to resultatives, particles, and

datives. Proceedings of NELS 25, 457-471. Soh, H. L. & Kuo, J.Y-C.. (2002). Perfective aspect and accomplishment situations

in Mandarin Chinese. In Proceedings of the Perspectives on Aspect Conference, University of Utrecht, http://www-uilots.let.uu.n~conferences/Per- spectives~on~Aspect~PspectivesonAspect/P_o_A_index.html.oOAAindex.htrnl.

Sorace, A. (1993). Incomplete vs. divergent representations of unaccusativity in non-native grammars of Italian. Second Language Research, 9,22-47.

Spagis, A. A. (1961). Obrazovanie i' upotreblenie vidov glagola v russkom jazyke [Derivation and Use of Verbal Aspects in Russian]. Moscow: Uchpedgiz.

Speas, M. (1 990). Phrase structure and natural language. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Speas, M. (1991). Functional heads and the Mirror Principle. Lingua, 84, 181-214. Stephany, U. (1981). Verbal grammar in Modem Greek early child language. In P.

Dale & D. Ingram (Eds.), Child language: An internationalperspective (pp. 45- 57). Baltimore: University Park Press.

Stephany, U. (1985). Aspekt, tempus und modalitat, zur entwicklung der verbalgrammatik (Vol. 4). Tiibingen: Gunter Nan Verlag.

Stephany, U. (1986). Modality. In P. Fletcher & M. Garrnan (Eds.), Language acquisition (pp. 375-400). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Stephany, U. (1997). The acquisition of Greek. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The cross linguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 183-333). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Stewart, 0. T. (2001). The serial verb construction parameter. New York: Garland. Stoll, S. (1998). Acquisition of Russian aspect. First Language, 18, 351-377. Stowell, T. (1982). The tense of infinitives. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 561-570. Stowell, T. (1983). Subjects across categories. The Linguistic Review, 2,285-312. Stowell, T. (1993). The syntax of tense. Unpublished manuscript, University of

California-Los Angeles. Stowell, T. (1995). What do the present and past tenses mean? In P. M. Berinetto,

V. Bianchi, J. Higginbotham & M. Squartini (Eds.) Temporal reference, aspect and actionality. Vol I : Semantic and syntactic perspectives (pp. 381-396). Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.

Stump, G. (2001). Inflectional morphology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Svenonius, P. (2001). Case and event structure. In N. Zhang (Ed.) ZAS Working Papers 26. Berlin: ZAS.

Svenonius, P. (2002). Icelandic C a ~ e and the structure of events. Unpublished manuscript, University of Tromsa.

Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sybesma, R. (1992). Causatives and accomplishments. Ph.D. dissertation, Leiden University.

Tai, J. H. Y. (1984). Verbs and times in Chinese: Vendler's four categories. In D. Testen, V. Mishra & J. Drogo (Eds.), Papersfiom the Parasession on Lexical Semantics (pp. 289-296). Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.

Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed), Language ypology and syntactic description (vol 3): Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57-150). Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press. Talrny, L. (2000). Towards a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in con-

versational discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Tenny, C. (1987). Gramrnaticalizing aspect and affectedness. Ph.D. dissertation.

MIT. Tenny, C. (1992). The aspectual interface hypothesis.. In I. A. Sag & A. Szabolcsi

(Eds.), Lexical matters (pp. 1-27). Stanford, CA: CSLI. Tenny, C. (1994). Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht:

Kluwer. Tenny, C. (2000). Core events and adverbial modification. In C. Tenny & J.

Pustejovsky (Eds.), Events as grammatical objects (pp. 285-332). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Tomlin, R. S. (1984). The treatment of foreground-background in the on-line descriptive discourse of second language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, 1 15-142.

Travis, L. (1992). Two quirks of structure: Non-projecting heads and the Mirror Image Principle. Journal of Linguistics, 28, 469-484.

Travis, L. (1994). Event phrase and a theory of functional categories. In P. Koskinen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1994 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistics Association (pp. 559-570). Toronto: Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics.

Travis, L. (2000a). Event structure in' syntax. In C. Tenny & J. Pustejovsky (Eds.), Events as grammatical objects (pp. 145-185). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Travis, L. (2000b). The 1-syntaxls-syntax boundary: evidence from Austronesian. In I. Paul, V. Phillips & L.Travis (Eds), Formal Issues in Austronesian Syntax (pp. 167-194). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Travis, L. (2003a). Lexical items and zero morphology. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl & H. Goodluck (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2002): L2 Links (pp. 315-330). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.

Travis, L. (2003b). Agents and causes in Malagasy and Tagalog. In A. Rakowski & N. Richards (Eds.) Proceedings of Austronesian Formal Linguistics Asso- ciation, MITWPL 44 (pp. 355-369). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Truckenbrodt, H. (1995). Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence. Ph. D. dissertation, MIT.

Tsimpli, I. (1992). Functional categories and maturation: The prefunctional stage of language acquisition. Ph.D. dissertation, University College London.

Turian, D. & Altenberg, E. P. (1991). Compensatory strategies of chlld first language attrition. In H. W. Seliger & R. M. Vago (Eds.), First language attrition (pp. 207-226). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Uriagereka, J. (1995). Aspects of 'the syntax of clitic placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry, 26,79-123.

Vairel, H. (1982). Les phrases conditionnelles / hypothktiques en franqais: La valeur de si A,B. L 'Information Grammaticale, 14, 5-10.

van Gelderen, E. (2003). ASP(ect) in English modal complements. Studia Linguistics, 57, 27-43

van Gelderen, E. & van der Meulen, I. (1998). Root infinitives in Russian: evidence from acquisition. Unpublished manuscript, Leiden University

van Hout, A. (1992). Linking and projection based on event structure. Unpublished manuscript, Tilburg University.

van Hout, A. (1996). Event semantics of verb frame alternations. Ph.D. dissertation, Tilburg University.

van Hout, A. (1998). On the role of direct objects and particles in learning telicity in Dutch and English. Proceedings of BUCLD 22,397-408.

van Hout, A. (2000). Event semantics in the lexicon-syntax interface. In C. Tenny & J. Pustejovsky (Eds.), Events as grammatical objects (pp. 239-282), Stanford, CA: CSLI.

van Hout, A. (2000). Projection based on event structure. In Everaert, M., Cooprnans, P. & Grimshaw, J. (Eds.), Lexical specijkation and insertion (403- 427). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

van Hout, A. (to appear). Acquiring telicity cross-linguistically: On the acquisition of telicity entailments associated with transitivity. In M. Bowennan & P. Brown (Eds.) Crosslinguistic perspectives on argument structure: Implications for learnability. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

van Hout, A. & Mlynarczyk, A. (1999). Acquiring aspect in Polish. Unpublished manuscript, UiL OTS, University of Utrecht.

van Riemsdijk, H. & Huybregts, R. (2002). Location and locality. Unpublished manuscript, Tilburg University.

van Riemsdijk, H. (1990). Functional prepositions. In Pinkster H. & Genke, G. (Eds.) Unity in diversity (pp. 23 1-24 1). Dordrecht: Foris.

Varlokosta, S., Vainikka, A. & Rohrbacher, B. (1998). Functional projections, markedness, and 'root infinitives' in early child Greek. The Linguistic Review, 15, 187-207.

Vendler, Z. (1957). Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review, 66, 143-160. Reprinted in Vendler, Z. (1967) Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

Verkuyl, H. J. (1972). On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Verkuyl, H. J. (1987). Nondurative closure of events. In J. A. G. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh, & M. J. B. Stokhof (Eds.), Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers (pp. 87-1 13). Dordrecht: Foris.

Verkuyl, H. J. (1989). Aspectual classes and aspectual composition. Linguistics and Philosophy, 12,39-94

Verkuyl, H. J. (1993). A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Verkuyl, H. J. (1999). Events as dividuals: Aspectual composition and event semantics. In J. Higginbotham et al. (Eds.), Speaking of events (pp. 169-206). New YorWOxford: Oxford University Press.

Vet, C. (1991). The temporal structure of discourse: Setting change and perspective.

In S. Fleischman & L. R. Waugh (Eds.) Discourse-pragmatics and the verb (pp. 7-25). London: Routledge.

Vinnitskaya, I. & Wexler, K. (2001). The role of pragmatics in the development of Russian aspect. First Language, 21, 143-1 86.

Vlach, F. (1981). The semantics of the progressive. In P. Tedeschi & A. Zaenen (Eds.), Syntax & Semantics Vol. 14: Tense and aspect (pp. 271-292). New York: Academic Press.

von Stechow, A. (1995). Lexical decomposition in syntax. In U. Egli, P. E. Pause, C. Schwartze, A. von Stechow & G. Wienold (Eds.), Lexical knowledge in the organization of language (pp. 8 1-1 17). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

von Stutterheim, C. (1991). Narrative and description: Temporal reference in second language acquisition. In T. Huebner & C. A. Ferguson (Eds.), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories (pp. 385- 403). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W. (1989). Referential movement in descriptive and narrative discourse. In R. Dietrich & C. F. Graumann (Eds.), Language processing in social context (pp. 39-76). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Wagner, L. (1997). Children's comprehension of viewpoint aspect. Proceedings of BUCLD 21,689-694.

Wagner, L. (1998). What children know when they know about viewpoint aspect: Aspect and Theory of Mind. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 22, 77-86.

Wagner, L. (2001). Aspectual influences on early tense comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 28,661-68 1.

Weinrich, H. (1964). Tempus. Stuttgart: Besprochene und erzahlte Welt. Kolhhammer.

Weist, R. (1986). Tense and aspect: Temporal systems in child language. In P. Fletcher & M. Garman (Eds.) Language acquisition (pp. 356-374). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Weist, R., Witkowska-Stadnik, K., Wysocka H. & Buczkowska, K. (1984). The defective tense hypothesis: On the emergence of tense and aspect in child Polish. Journal of Child Language, 11, 347-374.

Weist, R., Wysocka, H. & Lyytmen, P. (1991). A cross-linguistic perspective on the development of temporal systems. Journal of Child Language, 18,67-92.

Wesche, M. & Paribakht, T. S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth vs. breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 13-40.

Wexler, K. (1994). Optional infinitives, verb movement and the economy of derivation in child grammar. In D. Lightfoot & N. Hornstein (Eds.), Verb movement (pp. 305-345). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wexler, K. & Manzini, M. R. (1987). Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 41-76). Dordrecht: Reidel.

White, L. (1981). The responsibility of grammatical theory to acquisitional data. In N. Hornstein & D. Lightfoot (Eds.), Explanation in linguistics (pp. 241-283). London: Longman.

Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. Cambridge, M A : MIT Press. Wiberg, E. (1996). Reference to past events in bilingual Italian-Swedish children of

school age. Linguistics, 34, 1087- 1 1 14. Wickboldt, J. (2000). Some effects of manner adverbials on meaning. In C. Tenny

& J. Pustejovsky (Eds.), vents as grammatical objects (pp. 359-374). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Wijnen, F. (1994). Incremental acquisition of phrase structure: a longitudinal analysis of verb placement in Dutch. Unpublished manuscript, Groningen University.

Wijnen, F. (1996). Temporal reference and eventivity in root infinitives. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 12, 1-25.

Wimmer, H. & Perner J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103-128.

Zagona, K. (1990). Times as temporal argument structure. Paper presented at the Time in Language Conference, MIT.

Zagona, K. (1995). Temporal argument structure: Configurational elements of construal. In P. M. Berinetto, V. Bianchi, J. Higginbotham & M. Squartini (Eds.) Temporal reference, aspect and actionality, Vol I : Semantic and syntactic perspectives (pp. 396-410). Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.

Zagona, K. (1996). Compositionality of aspect: Evidence from Spanish aspectual se. In C. Parodi et al. (Eds.), Aspects of Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XYIV (pp. 475-488). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Zagona, K. 1999. Voice and aspect. In J. Franco, A. Landa & J. Martin (Eds.), Grammatical analyses of Basque and Romance Linguistics (pp. 279-293). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Zagona, K. (2004). Tense construal in complement clauses: Verbs of commu- nication and the double access reading. In J. Gutron & J. Lecarrne (Eds.), The syntax of time (pp. 637-654). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Zagona, K. (in press). Measuring out complement clause tenses. Probus. Zanuttini, R. (1997). Negation and structure. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press. Zemskaya, E. A. et al. (2001). Jazyk Russkogo Zarubezhja [Language of Russian

emigration]. MoscowNienna: Wiener Slawisticher Almanach. Zubizarreta, M. L. (1987). Levels of representation in the lexicon and in the syntax.

Dordrecht: Foris. Zucchi, S. & M. White. (2001). Twigs, sequences and the temporal constitution of

predicates. Linguistics and Philosophy, 24, 187-222.

INDEX

accomplishments, 2-4,7, 8-1 1,39 fn.9, 73, 79-80, 83, 87, 99, 120 fn.8, 241, 262 fn.3, 347-348, 354, 357-359, 366 fn.5, fn.6, 385-386, 395 h.27, 397-398,407-410,418 fn.6,419 fn.15

achievements, 2, 4, 6-7, 79, 82, 86, 106, 126, 141-142, 172, 176, 241, 261 h.3, 347-348, 354, 357-359, 366 fn.6, 375, 386,395 fn.27, 397-398,403,407-408,410

across-category analysis, 4 10 activities, 2-4, 7, 8, 11, 39 fn.9, 75,

79-80, 82-84, 87, 93 fn.33, 99, 119, 289 fn.24,301, 346, 348- 349,355,357-359,375-376,385- 386, 397-399,404-405,407-410, 413,419 fn.6

adverbials and discourse structure, 226-227,

230, 232-235, 244-248,254- 261,263 fn.22,264 h.30,418 fn.9

and event structure, 100- 10 1, 141-143

as aspectual modifersloperators, 16, 125, 133-136, 138,251, 254-261, 262 h.31, fn.34, 381-382

as diagnostic for telicity, 2, 6, 12, 59,63, 125-126, 144 fn.4, 149-150, 171, 178-179, 181, 262 fn.15, 366 fn. 7

durative, 2, 200,234-235, 244, 366 h .3

frequency, 226-227 manner, 255 time, 6, 14, 125-126,230, 232,

220 fn.7 adverbs

as spatiotemporal predicates, 13- 14, 196-206

affected object, 23, 177, 181, 356, 385 see also Incremental Theme

agent, 21, 27-28, 30-33, 35-38, 70, 73-74,93 h . 33,95-96, 102-104, 110-1 15, 173-174, 184-186, 276- 28 1,286-287

agentivelagentivity, 9, 21-22,28, 30, 33, 38, 83, 96, 112, 118, 133, 134,136,380

agreement, 15,21-23,26-33,35-36, 38,52-55,61-62, 68 h.14,77, 109, 112, 172,294-297,300,303, 306,312,314 fn.10, fn.18,315 fn.22, 370, 377, 379-380, 394 fn. 14, fn. 15

Aktionsart, 1,2, 121,342 fn.2, 369 American Russian, 14, 369-394 anchoring

of event, 317, 323, 330-332, 336- 338

of timesltemporal, 172, 177, 188, 206-2 l9,22 1 h . 16,274, 280, 295,3 12

animacy (animate), 9, 1 l , 2 1-22,28, 30, 33, 37-38, 39 h.6, 95-96, 102-105, 107, 110, 114-1 16, 118, 120 fn.13, 186

animacy hierarchy, 28 arguments

external, 11,28,70,81,83,92 h.23, fn.32, 93 fn.32, fn.33, 100, 103, 110-1 15, 128, 144 fn.14, 185

internal, 71, 73, 76, 92 fn.15, 105-106, 121 see also direct object

lexicon to syntactic mapping of, 3, 98

licensing of, 12, 121-122, 138, 140, 143

projection, 9,95, 101-102, 105, 114, 118-119

structure, 70, 80,95-99, 114-1 15, 118, 119 fn.3, 121, 129-130, 139,147,151, 159, 166,262 fn.9, 263 fn.24

sharing, 130-132, 138, 140-142 syntactic positions of, 2 1-22,33-

34, 76, 78, 80, 99, 148, 154, 160-161, 174, 183-185

time-denoting, 13, 192-206,211- 214,220 fn.l,395 fn.23

argument (discourse mode), 223- 225,230,236

Aspect Hypothesis, 17,373,376- 377,384,387-388,393 fn.12,394 fn.15, 397-399,404,408,410, 417

Aspect Phrase, 4, 13, 70, 80,350 AspP, 9, 10, 13-15,21,26-28,

30-31, 39 fn.3, 71, 78, 82, 182-183, 187, 189 fn.6,303- 304,307-308,351

aspectual auxiliaries, 308-3 10 aspectual coercion, see coercion aspectual focus, 239,243-244,248,

252-258,261,262 fn. 12,269 aspectual pairs, 3 18, 342 fn.2, 372,

393 fn.7 aspectual stage see stage aspectual type shift, 16, 239, 270

see also coercion aspectual verb classes, 69, 81, 86, 90 assertion, 191, 196, 204,214, 244,

267-268,272-273,276-277, 279, 305

atelicity (atelic), 2, 5, 7, 12,41,47, 53,66, 72-73, 81, 87, 99, 102, 147, 149-152, 154, 178, 180,220, 234-235,237,240,249,255-257, 264,270-271,275,277-278,281- 282,288-289,347,349,360,369, 371,376,388,398

atemporal text, 225, 230,236 atomicity, 240,262 fn.3

background (discourse), 7, 17, 18,

223,273, 275-276,280,282,322, 337,402-404,412,418 fn.6

bare mass noun, 42-43,47, 57,66 fn.3

bare plural, 9,42-47,49,72, 80, 87, 144 fn.7,180,227

belief base, 275,279-280, 287,289 boundedness, 5, 30,48, 65, 67 fn. 12,

91 fn.3, 125, 178-181, 187,347, 361,363-364,366 fn.4,386,394 fn.17

Bounded Event Constraint, 227 Bulgarian, 5, 73, 75-76, 80, 91 fn.8,

314 fn.17,366 fn.3

Case, 4, 9, 10,21-28,30-31,33, 35, 37-38, 91 fn.2,220 fn.7 accusative, 4,23-25, 388-389 ergative, 28, 30, 3 1 nominative, 28, 31 partitive, 25, 53, 388

Catalan, 296,399,400,404,405 causative, 73,93 fn.34,96, 100-102,

112-114, 118, 120 fn.8, 128, 174, 220 fn.1, 366 fn.9

cause (Cause), 82,96, 103, 110-1 18, 249

change of state, 83, 101, 110-111, 117, 175,231, 240, 249,267, 277,283,321,385,395 fn.26

checking domains see featurelcase checking

checlung relations see featurelcase checking

Chinese, 23,25,26,28,35,45, 73, 76, 83, 92 fn.17, 93 fn.32

Classifier Phrase, 45 co-composition, 122, 123, 13 1, 136-

138,140,143 coercion, 6, 122,226, 227,235, 262

fn.8, fn.11, 263 fn.25, 264 fn.33, 270,288, fn.8,340,386 see also aspectual type-shift

complement clause, 172- 173, 176, 182, 188,203,205-206,211-219,

221 fn.15, 227-228,235,237 fn.6 completive aspect, 346-348, 35 1-

352,354-357,360-362,364 complex preposition, 148, 154-1 55,

158,162 comprehension (experimentsltasks),

17, 99,318-325,336,340 conative, 79, 120 fn. 1 1 conditionnel, 283-286, 289 conflated (conflation), 180-1 81, 187 constructionalist, 1-2,4, 11-12, 95-

99, 103, 114-1 15, 118, 119 fn.3 context (discourse), 6, 16, 17, 122,

134, 138, 139, 223, 224,227, 235,236,256, 258,261,266-268, 273-274,277-278,280,284-287, 288 fn.l1,323,324,339, 340, 347,356,407-408,414-415

continuous (interpretation), 400,418 fn. 1

copula, 12, 122-145 cumulative, 47-50, 56-57, 60-61 Czech, 53, 394 fn.16

definite (definiteness), 2,9,21,23- 27, 35, 39 fn.3,46, 52-54, 66 fn.6, 122, 138, 227, 339

degree achievements, 106-107, 126- 127, 144 fn.7

delimitation, 9, 10,21-28, 30,33, 37-38,39 fn.1, 55,347, 366 fn.2

deontic modality, 298, 307, 308 description

eventuality, 6, 125-126, 129, 3 17 definite, 66 fn.6

description (discourse mode), 223, 234-236,411-412

detachability, 25 1 direct object

as delimiter of event, 3,4, 9-10 21-26, 39 fn.l,41, 52-58, 61- 65,67fn.9,74,81,83,319, 373,376,385-386

interpretation with preverbs, 53- 54,74,347-349,352,355-

358,360-361,363,366 fn.8 of performance verbs, 181-1 82,

186 semantic properties of, 9- 10,42-

5 1 see also affected object;

Incremental Theme directionaVdirective PP, 12, 87, 105,

147-167, 167 fn.5, 168 fn.9, 171, 183

discourse, 1, 6-9, 15-17, 21-22,28, 34-35, 37-38, 124, 137-138, 143, 3 17-3 18, 323-324, 330-341, 397, 399,401-402,409,411,418 fn.9 modes, 15,223-237 structure, 17,244,265, 318,323,

332,339,341 referents, 196, 270 relations, 17,262,265,268,269,

271,273,275-277,279,282- 283.285-289

Discourse Representation Theory (DRT), 1, 6, 16,225,232, 253, 262 fn.7,265,333

Distributed Morphology, 12, 12 1 - 122

distributional bias, 371,384,393 fn.5

divisive (divisiveness), 48-50, 57- 58, 66 fn.3, 67 fn.12

double access reading (DAR), 13, 172, 175-179, 182, 188,221 fn.15

durative (aspect)/durativity, 3, 8, 125-127, 144 fn.7, 237 fn.7, 244- 247,25 l-252,4OO, 404

Dutch, 74, 75, 84-86, 99, 158,297- 299, 308, 3 11, 314 fn.13, 339, 399 Brabandish, 84

Dyirbal, 28, 30-31, 33-34 dynamism, 225,227-228,23 1-232,

235 egressive, 79, 80 English, 39 fn.3, 42, 51-52, 55, 61,

65, 70, 72, 83, 85, 89, 95, 97,99,

101-102, 105, 107, 109-111, 113, 115, 123, 124, 125, 133, 139, 143,205,220 fn.2,226,232, 244,245,254-256,263 fn.26,264 fn.34, 266,267, 283, 301, 31 1- 312,314 fn.18, 315 fn.19, 332, 388,416

epistemic, 284-285, 298, 307 estar (Portuguese), 12, 123-124,

127-128, 131-140, 144 fn.17, 145 fn.2 1

Euchee, 28-33,39 fn.7 event, 1-6,9-11, 13-14, 17,21-29,

31,34,38,39fn.l,fn.6,41,42, 50-61, 65-66, 67 fn.7, fn.8, 70-75, 79-87, 89-90,99, 100, 102, 106- 108, 111, 113-115, 120 fn.8, 122, 125-126, 130, 136, 140-143, 145 fn.11, fn.12, 147, 149-153, 159, 166, 171-188, 192, 194-196,203, 204,223-237,251-253,263 fn.21,272,303,307, 312, 317, 318,320,322-324,330-338, 340- 341, 346,360, 366 fn.2, 381-382, 385-386,392, 395 fn.31, 398- 399,401,411

event measurelevent measuring DP, 4, 71-73, 80-81, 83, 85-86,92 fn.11, fn.17, fn.32, 177, 188, 385

Event Phrase, 174,350 EP, 67 fn.7, 350, 351, 362, 363,

367 fn.10 event structure, 4, 9, 1 1, 51,74, 84,

87,90,95-100, 120 fn. 8, 121, 124,129,130, 131,143,145 fn.22, 159,166,174,179, 183, 185, 187,220 fn.l,251-253,263 fn.21, 307, 380

eventive, 15, 100, 102, 125, 126, 129, 131-133, 137,214,219,295, 299-300,307-308,3 14 fn. 13

eventualities, 15, 16, 125, 129, 131, 196,225, 227-230, 232-234,236, 237 fn.5, 239, 242, 261 fn.l,265, 266, 269, 299, 3 11, 347,349,

350,352,362,363,366 fn.3,394 fn.20

evidentiality, 125, 266, 287, 3 14 fn.17

existential closure, 69, 125 external argument see argument,

external

fact, 228-229, 284 featurelcase checking, 4, 12,23,26,

30, 33, 38,42, 125, 144 h.14, 149, 159-163, 166-167, 167 fn.2, 303,305-306,311-323,314 fn.10, 379

features interpretable, 9, 12,26, 28, 149,

159, 164, 166-167, 169, 171, 173, 176-177,210,237,362

uninterpretable, 9, 12, 26, 150, 168-169, 172-173, 176,202, 209-210,212-213,389

ficar, 123-124, 127-128, 131-132, 138, 140-143, 145 fn.20, fn.21

Figure (vs. Ground), 13, 19 1-192, 194,23 1-232

finiteness, 299-300, 303, 305-306, 308

Finnish, 23, 25-28, 53,388 foreground, 7,223,322,337,402-

404,411-412,418 fn.11 French, 15, 16,205,220 fn.3,221

fn.12, 237 fn.2, 255,259,262 fn. 19,264 fn.34,265-290,293- 294,300,308, 314 fn.12,399- 401,403,405,409,414,416

frequency (of verb forms), 384,390, 393 fn.10, 394 fn.15, 405-406, 410,413,417

functional head, 21,77, 122, 147-149, 154,

156, 159, 161, 166,303 projection, 4, 9, 12, 13, 14, 22,

26-27, 30, 32, 38,42, 148, 159-160, 163, 165-166, 168 fn.8, 381

hnctor, 9, 72, 83,91 futur, 269, 283-285,290 future (tense), 191-192, 195,208-

212,215-218,221 h.12, fn.13, 227

generalizing sentences, 227 Generative Lexicon, 12, 122,250 generic, 137,225,227, 3 1 1,411 German, 74, 75, 87-90, 123,237,

293,297,301,308,314 fn.13 goal, 3, 73, 87, 97, 102, 105, 150,

167,173,189 fn.7,237 fn.7 grammatical aspect, 8, 14, 17, 121,

191-195,242-243,258,277,332- 333,342 fn.1, 369, 371-375, 380- 384,388-389,399-400,402,417 see also sentential aspect; viewpoint aspect

Greek, 15, 116,221 fn.12,293-315 grounding, 411,418 h.10

habitual (interpretation), 132, 144 fn.4, 226, 311, 382,400,402, 408-409,413-415,418 fn.1

Hebrew, 24-25,27-28,99,237 fn.5 homogeneous (homogeneity), 10,

49, 57-58, 65,66 fn.3, 125, 141, 307

homomorphism, 55-56

Icelandic, 23,26-27, 395 h.33 idiosyncratic lexicalization, 10, 69 Illocano, 34 illocutionary force, 16, 265-269,

272,274,275, 277,288 h.19, 289 fn.20, h.27

illocutionary viewpoint, 16,265, 269,272-274,276-277,284-285, 287,288 h.13,289 h.20, fn.27, 290 h.32

imparfait, 16, 17,220 h.3, 237 h.2, 265-285, 288 h.11, fn.16, 289 fn.20, fn.23, 290 h.32,400,408, 418 h.10

imperfect, 5, 6, 17, 18, 116, 176,

179,397-417,418 fn.1, fn.3, fn.7, fn.10, fn.11

imperfective aspect, 5-8, 16-1 8, 54, 63-64, 75,91 fn.6,93 fn.33, 125, 133,220 fn.3,227,253-254,267- 268,271,273-278,281,285-286, 288,288 fn.13,294,296-300, 302, 306-307,314 fn.6, 317-326, 329-341,346,360,363,369,371- 378,381, 383, 387-389, 392-395, 397-400,402,404,408,409,414, 416- 417,419 h.13

implicature, 17, 81, 274-275,282 inception (inceptive), 6, 79, 85-86,

91,245,248,373 inchoative, 11, 101, 105, 108, 113,

118, 128, 172, 176,252,288 h.8, 307,366 h . 9

incremental theme, 1 1,96, 106, 178, 319,324,385

individual-level, 123, 138, 144 fn. 19 Indonesian, 34 information (discourse mode), 15,

225,230,235-236 inner aspect (InnerAspP), 337,369,

380,383,394 fn.15 interlanguage grammars, 7, 345,

389,398-399,405,409,416-417 irrealis, 15,295, 297, 301-306, 308,

310,313 fn.4,314 h.8, 315 h.9, 40 1

Italian, 5, 11,95-96, 99, 101-105, 107-108, 11 1-1 17, 120 h.12, 176, 296, 301, 307,309,311-13, 314 fn.10, fn.15, 315 fn.25, fn.26, 338-339,341-342,399-402,404- 405,408,410,418 h .6

iterative, 76, 78, 93 h.38,240, 245, 247,259,260,366,382,400

Japanese, 34,35,389,399,414-415, 418 fn.6

judgment tasks, 343 h.6,353,357, 362,365,413,416

Korean, 8, 34

1-syntax (1-features), 10- 1 1, 70-7 1, 75, 82, 84, 346, 350-352, 358-364

Lahu, 34 language attrition, 9, 390, 393 lexical aspect, 1-2,4-6, 8, 14, 38,

121, 126, 239,243, 252,254, 257,261,270-271,299,332,343 fh.10, 369, 371,373, 380, 382, 384,385, 388-389, 399,403,410, 413-417,419 fn.15 see also situation aspect

Lexical Aspect Hypothesis, 373, 376-377, 384, 387-388, 393 h.12, 394 h.15

Lexical Conceptual Structure, 98 lexicalist approach, 95-96, 118-1 19 lexicon, 3,4, 8, 16, 37,90, 95-97,

99, 121, 122, 127, 148, 159, 160, 166, 171, 174, 176,243,245, 254,262,404,407

lexicon-syntax interface, 96-97, 99 LF, 26, 129,219 linking rules, 98, 342 Lisu, 9,34-38 locative PP, 13, 147-167, 167 fn.2,

183

Malagasy, 10, 34, 70, 80-83,93, 105 manner incorporation, 106 mereological approach, 16,239,

250-252,263 fn.26 metaphorical motion, 23 1, 236 modal, 15, 259, 260,262-263, 269,

279-281,283-289, h . 19, fn. 21, h.28, 295-308,310-312, 313 h.4, 3 14 h .6

Modal Reference Effect, 15,297- 299,305,308,313 h .4

null modal hypothesis, 301-302 mood, 56, 176, 294-295, 297, 305,

306,311,313-315,370 MOO&', 15,303-312,314

narrative, 7, 17, 18, 273-275,282, 327,333-336,339-340,401-405, 407-412,414,418 h.6, fn.10, h.11,419 fn.12, fn.13 impersonal, 403-404, 408, 410,

412 personal, 18,403-404,408,412 structure, 7,403,411

narrative (discourse mode), 15, 225- 226, 230, 232-233

Navajo, 76-78, 80,90-92 negative imperatives, 309-3 1 1, 3 14

fn.16 non-atomic, 44, 240,242,258-259 non-eventive, 299 non-finite clause, 294, 297 non-prototypical, 399,408,414 Norwegian, 11, 13, 147, 150, 158,

176-177, 183

object, see affected object; direct object

object split, 9,22,24,26-28,38 one-to-one principle, 409 ontology (event ontology), 263 Optional Infinitive, 294,3 1 1 outer aspect (OuterAspP), 337, 380-

381,394-395

passato prossimo, 3 12,338-339 passt simple, 6, 237, 256,263, 267,

269,271-273,275-277,286,288- 290

Path, 13, 171-175, 177-183, 185- 189, 369, 375,385-386, 388-389, 395 Path-based theory, 369

perfect aspect (English), 191-192, 194-195

perfect participle, 301-302,3 12 perfective aspect, 5-8, 10, 14-17, 54-

55, 60-67, 68 fn.13, 73, 82, 91 fn.6, 137, 196, 198-200,203-204, 21 1, 220 fn.5,226-227, 232,235, 252-253,263 h.24,267,271-

273,276-278,283,293-313,317- 325,327,329-338,345-347,350- 358,360-361, 363,366, 367, 369, 380-383, 387-389,391-393 fn.7, fn. 10, 397-400,402-411,414, 416-417 prefix, 54,60 see also preverb bare, 15,293-31 1,314 h.10,373 past (Portuguese), 133-134

person, 9, 15, 22,23, 29-34,40, 76, 92, 123, 294,296-297,303, 307, 315,379,412

plurality, 42-43,45-46,49, 346, 348, 350,357,361,363-364,366-367

Polish, 10, 17, 75-76, 318-320, 323, 325,327, 331, 335, 337-341,345, 347,350, 351-354, 357,360-362, 394,409,415

Portuguese, 12, 123-143, 145 fn.20 predication, 37,92, 100, 112, 131,

138, 184, 196-197,204-205,220 h . 9

prepositional phrases, 105, 149, 159, 167, 175 see also locative PP, directional PP

preterite past (Spanish), 6, 176, 179 preverb (Slavic), 5, 10, 73-75, 86,

92,346, 351-352, 354, 358, 360- 361,363,366-367 see also perfective prefix

primary referent, 23 1-232,235-236 primitive, 4, 5, 173-174, 188 fn.3,

242,243 process, 2,4, 6-7, 12, 39 h.9, 82, 93

h.33, 106, 120 h.8, 125, 129, 130, 141, 145 h.26, 159, 161, 174,220 h.1, 240,245, 263, 307, 366 h.6,409

processing, 338, 340-341 progressive, 7, 14, 16, 133, 134, 139,

140, 177, 191-193,220,232,240, 242,245,247,254-256,259,262; 263, 266,269,271,274,310, 332, 338, 382, 397-400,408,413,

414,416 Projection Principle, 98 propositions, 56,225,228-229,236,

267,284,289 Prototype Theory, 7,398 prototypical, 7, 22,24,29, 398-399,

404,408-409,414-415,417,418 fn. 1

punctuality constraint, 237, 3 12

quantification, 6,41,44,349 quantity, 5,9-10,24,3 1,41-55, 58-

62, 64-66, 66 fn.3, h.5, fn.6, 125, 348-349,357,363,399 Quantity Phrase (#P), 9,42,45-

47, 51, 54-55,66 h . 6 quantization (quantized), 9, 10, 23,

26, 28, 30, 38,47-48, 50, 56-58, 61-62, 65,67 fn.12,68 fn.13, 177

reaction time, 413,417 realis, 3 11 reflexive

binding of, 36, 152-153, 157- 158, 164-166

clitic (Romance), 1 l,96, 105, 111,113-114, 120 h.15

relative clauses, 203, 22 1 report (discourse mode), 225,230,

233 resultative, 3, 11, 16, 73, 87, 92, 96,

99, 104-111, 120 h.12, 182, 185, 186,220 h.2,240,245-247, 25 1 - 252,259,373,393,414 see also state, resultant

rhetorical relations, 16, 265, 268, 273,277,286

Romance, 5, 6, 15,46, 112, 126, 237,263,265,267,309-31 1,399- 401,408,417

root inhitive (RI), 16, 293-3 15 Russian, 14, 15,23, 60, 62, 64, 120,

226,300,308, 315,318-323,331, 333,336,338,366,369-391,393- 395,415

s-syntax (s-features), 11, 346,350, 352,358-363,367

secondary predicate, 106- 107, 1 1 1, 182-183, 187

Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (SDRT), 253,262,265, 268,273-274, 276,282,286, 288, 290

semantics-discourse interface, 18, 317-318, 330,332,336-338, 341

semantics-pragmatics interface, 253 semelfactive, 62-63, 68 sentential aspect, 1,4,5-6 see also

grammatical aspect, viewpoint aspect

ser (Portuguese), 12, 123-124, 127- 129, 13 1-140, 145 h.22, fn.26

situation aspect, 1, 2, 5,9, 10, 15, 78,79, 80, 82-83,90,369 see also lexical aspect

situation structure, 239,25 1,288 entities, 15,224-225,227, 229,

230,232,235-237 types, 34,40,226, 228,239-240,

242,263,269-270,326 Slave, 10, 39 fn.7, 76, 78, 80, 85-86,

90-92 Slavic, 2, 10, 14, 53, 55, 60-62, 65-

67, 73, 318-319, 333, 338,342, 346,364,366,394

small clause, 1 1, 72, 84, 92, 109- 112, 120 fn.11, fn.13, 158, 186

Spanish, 120 fn. 15, 124, 145 fn.21, 176, 179,296, 399,400-404,408, 412-416

spatial axis, 13, 17 1 spatiotemporal predicate, 19 1, 193-

195, 197,200-201,203,205-206 Spec (specifier), 10, l l ,22, 26,30-

33, 37-38, 39 fn.3,42-43, 52-55, 61, 62, 64-65, 67, 70-71, 81, 83, 85,91,93, 110,204,381

specificity, 8, 10-1 1, 15-17,21,23, 25-27, 39 fn.l,69, 74, 91 fn.2,

346,356,364 speech act, 16,31,244,253,257,

262,265-269,272- 277,279-283, 285-287,289-290 speech act functions, 265 speech act referent, 253,265,

272-273,276-277,283,285- 287,290

SQA (Specified Quantity of A), 3, 8, 9,41, 72-74, 80, 83,85,89,91, 93, 180,348-349, 352,356,358

stage (aspectual), 16,239-264,269- 271,275,277-278, 283, 288 fn.4, fn. 6, fn. 9,289 fn.26 decomposition, 16, 240-242 inner, 240-245,248-249,25 1-

252,262,269-271,275,277- 278,283,288,289

preparatory, 240-242, 244-245, 247-248,251-252,258,260, 270,366 h . 6

relations, 16, 248-250, 254,262- 263,270-271

result, 240-242, 244-245,248- 249,250-251,255,257,259, 262-264,270-271,275,277- 279,283,288-289

salience, 16, 239,243-244, 246, 25 l-252,254,256,258-259, 263,270

visibility, 256 stage-level, 123, 134, 137-142, 145

h.23 states, 4,6, 7, 11-13, 18, 33-34,40,

59, 93 h.34, 96, 106, 108, 125, 127, 129-132, 136-142, 145 fn.22, 178, 182, 188 fn.4, 220 fn.1, 223,225-228,230-236, 240, 245,262-263, 280,288,312, 324, 334,347 fn.8,354,375,386,395, 398-399,404,408,410-411,413 resultant, 59, 105-106, 108-1 11,

127,220 fn. 1,241-242, 262 fn.4

statives (lexical), 405,407,412,413

Structure Preserving Binding, 13, 178

subevent, 4,6, 56-59, 100-101, 120 fn.8, 130-131, 136-143, 174-175, 179, 185, 220 fn.1, 251,263 fn.21

subeventualities, 239 subject, 7, 9, ll,21-22,28-39, 76,

78, 85, 87, 92 h.26, 95-96, 103, 105, 107, 109-1 14, 116, 118, 125, 133, 137, 144 fn. 14, 160-161, 180, 186,227,232,281 see also argument, external double, 34

subject split, 10, 12,21, 28,29, 30, 33,39 fn.9

syntactic domains, 352, 357-358, 361,364

syntax-semantics interface, 6, 42-43

Tagalog, 35,93 telicity (telic), 2, 5, 8-1 3, 16,22-24,

31, 41,46-48, 51, 53, 56-66,69- 73, 75, 76, 80-83,91-93, 105- 107, 111-1 12, 127, 151-152, 154, 180, 182,228, 235,274, 346-350, 363, 366,369, 373, 376, 385-386, 388,398 see also atelicity

telos, 59, 66, 120 temporal adjunct clauses, 203, 205,

21 l-213,220 temporality, 223, 225, 237,418 tense

acquisition of, 7, 377-380, 393 fn. 13,397-398,401-402,404, 407,410

and aspectual interpretation, 16, 125,237 h.2, 242,244,246- 247,252,254-257,265,266- 269,272-274,282,284-287, 332,338

and aspectual shift, 6, 16, 176, 239,242,252,262 fn.l1,264 fn.33, 265, 288 fn.8

and boundedness, 5, 1 1 1, 179,

187 as spatiotemporal predicate, 8,

191-197,203,369,382-383, 390-391.394 fn. 19

features and feature checking, 21-22,30,33,38, 303,305- 306,309,314 fn.l0,315 fn.25

in statives, 132-133, 135, 226- 227

interpretation in discourse, 230, 233-234,332

interpretation in subordinate clauses, 172, 175-177, 181- 182, 187,206-219

modal interpretation of, 304 morphology, 7, 76, 92 h.30,

128,295,299,339 see also anchoring, temporal

termination, 30, 86,91,240,262, 307

text text progression, 15, 18, 188-

189,220,223-225,230-232, 236-237,394,401,402,404, 407,414

text structure, 18, 237,402-403 text type, 401,404,408-412

thematic hierarchy, 38, 39, 173 theta theory, 184 topic, 9,21-22,33-38, 294, 305

Topic Phrase, 23, 38 transition, 12, 15, 59, 105, 124, 125,

129-132, 140-143, 175,249,267, 277,307,310-313,385-386,395 see also change of state

Turkish, 45, 90-91, 314 h.17 type shift, 16,239,270

unaccusative, 64, 85, 93,99, 112, 118,129, 168,171,188

underspecification, 18, 297, 305, 308,310-311,314-315

unergative, 84, 99, 105, 115, 168, 170

v (light verb), 10-12, 72-73, 77, 86, 92,95-118, 174, 184,314

V (head of VP), 10, 12,33,70,73, 75, 80, 83, 85, 91-92, 95-96, 103, 106-107, 109, 112, 114, 128-129, 131,159

verbs of belief, 172, 176 of communication, 13, 175, 179,

182-184, 186-187,228 of consumption, 103-1 10, 1 18,

179-180, 184-186 of creation, 89-90, 92 fn. 17, 126 of manner of motion, 101-102,

lo6 of motion (motion predicates),

11, 102, 147-148, 151, 157, 160-166, 171, 174, 177-179, 184, 186,192

of performance, 18 1 - 182 of propositional attitude, 228

veridicality, 276, 280, 285-287,289- 290

viewpoint aspect, 1, 5, 8, 15-17, 82, 91 h.6, 223,226-227, 239,242- 244,369,399,408 see also grammatical aspect; sentential aspect

Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

Managing Editors

Liliane Haegeman, University of GenevaJoan Maling, Brandeis UniversityJames McCloskey, University of California, Santa Cruz

Publications1. L. Burzio: Italian Syntax. A Government-binding Approach. 1986.

ISBN Hb 90-277-2014-2; Pb 90-277-2015-02. W.D. Davies: Choctaw Verb Agreement and Universal Grammar. 1986.

ISBN Hb 90-277-2065-7; Pb 90-277-2142-43. K. E. Kiss: Configurationality in Hungarian. 1987.

ISBN Hb 90-277-1907-1; Pb 90-277-2456-34. D. Pulleyblank: Tone in Lexical Phonology. 1986.

ISBN Hb 90-277-2123-8; Pb 90-277-2124-65. L. Hellan and K. K. Christensen: Topics in Scandinavian Syntax. 1986.

ISBN Hb 90-277-2166-1; Pb 90-277-2167-X6. K. P. Mohanan: The Theory of Lexical Phonology. 1986.

ISBN Hb 90-277-2226-9; Pb 90-277-2227-77. J. L. Aissen: Tzotzil Clause Structure. 1987.

ISBN Hb 90-277-2365-6; Pb 90-277-2441-58. T. Gunji: Japanese Phrase Structure Grammar. A Unification-based Approach.

1987. ISBN 1-55608-020-49. W. U. Wurzel: Inflectional Morphology and Naturalness. 1989

ISBN Hb 1-55608-025-5; Pb 1-55608-026-310. C. Neidle: The Role of Case in Russian Syntax. 1988 ISBN 1-55608-042-511. C. Lefebvre and P. Muysken: Mixed Categories. Nominalizations in Quechua.

1988. ISBN Hb 1-55608-050-6; Pb 1-55608-051-412. K. Michelson: A Comparative Study of Lake-Iroquoian Accent. 1988

ISBN 1-55608-054-913. K. Zagona: Verb Phrase Syntax. A Parametric Study of English and Spanish.

1988 ISBN Hb 1-55608-064-6; Pb 1-55608-065-414. R. Hendrick: Anaphora in Celtic and Universal Grammar. 1988

ISBN 1-55608-066-215. O. Jaeggli and K.J. Safir (eds.): The Null Subject Parameter. 1989

ISBN Hb 1-55608-086-7; Pb 1-55608-087-516. H. Lasnik: Essays on Anaphora. 1989

ISBN Hb 1-55608-090-5; Pb 1-55608-091-317. S. Steele: Agreement and Anti-Agreement. A Syntax of Luiseno. 1990˜

ISBN 0-7923-0260-518. E. Pearce: Parameters in Old French Syntax. Infinitival Complements. 1990

ISBN Hb 0-7923-0432-2; Pb 0-7923-0433-019. Y.A. Li: Order and Constituency in Mandarin Chinese. 1990

ISBN 0-7923-0500-0

Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

20. H. Lasnik: Essays on Restrictiveness and Learnability. 1990ISBN 0-7923-0628-7; Pb 0-7923-0629-5

21. M.J. Speas: Phrase Structure in Natural Language. 1990ISBN 0-7923-0755-0; Pb 0-7923-0866-2

22. H. Haider and K. Netter (eds.): Representation and Derivation in the Theoryof Grammar. 1991 ISBN 0-7923-1150-7

23. J. Simpson: Warlpiri Morpho-Syntax. A Lexicalist Approach. 1991ISBN 0-7923-1292-9

24. C. Georgopoulos: Syntactic Variables. Resumptive Pronouns and A’ Bindingin Palauan. 1991 ISBN 0-7923-1293-7

25. K. Leffel and D. Bouchard (eds.): Views on Phrase Structure. 1991ISBN 0-7923-1295-3

26. C. Tellier: Licensing Theory and French Parasitic Gaps. 1991ISBN 0-7923-1311-9; Pb 0-7923-1323-2

27. S.-Y. Kuroda: Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Collected Papers. 1992ISBN 0-7923-1390-9; Pb 0-7923-1391-7

28. I. Roberts: Verbs and Diachronic Syntax. A Comparative History of Englishand French. 1992 ISBN 0-7923-1705-X

29. A. Fassi Fehri: Issues in the Structure of Arabic Clauses and Words. 1993ISBN 0-7923-2082-4

30. M. Bittner: Case, Scope, and Binding. 1994 ISBN 0-7923-2649-031. H. Haider, S. Olsen and S. Vikner (eds.): Studies in Comparative Germanic

Syntax. 1995 ISBN 0-7923-3280-632. N. Duffield: Particles and Projections in Irish Syntax. 1995

ISBN 0-7923-3550-3; Pb 0-7923-3674-733. J. Rooryck and L. Zaring (eds.): Phrase Structure and the Lexicon. 1996

ISBN 0-7923-3745-X34. J. Bayer: Directionality and Logical Form. On the Scope of Focusing Particles

and Wh-in-situ. 1996 ISBN 0-7923-3752-235. R. Freidin (ed.): Current Issues in Comparative Grammar. 1996

ISBN 0-7923-3778-6; Pb 0-7923-3779-436. C.-T.J. Huang and Y.-H.A. Li (eds.): New Horizons in Chinese Linguistics.

1996 ISBN 0-7923-3867-7; Pb 0-7923-3868-537. A. Watanabe: Case Absorption and WH-Agreement. 1996

ISBN 0-7923-4203-838. H. Thrainsson, S.D. Epstein and S. Peter (eds.):´ Studies in Comparative Ger-

manic Syntax. Volume II. 1996 ISBN 0-7923-4215-139. C.J.W. Zwart: Morphosyntax of Verb Movement. A Minimalist Approach to the

Syntax of Dutch. 1997 ISBN 0-7923-4263-1; Pb 0-7923-4264-X40. T. Siloni: Noun Phrases and Nominalizations. The Syntax of DPs. 1997

ISBN 0-7923-4608-441. B.S. Vance: Syntactic Change in Medieval French. 1997 ISBN 0-7923-4669-642. G. Muller:¨ Incomplete Category Fronting. A Derivational Approach to Remnant

Movement in German. 1998 ISBN 0-7923-4837-0

Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

43. A. Alexiadou, G. Horrocks and M. Stavrou (eds.): Studies in Greek Syntax.1998 ISBN 0-7923-5290-4

44. R. Sybesma: The Mandarin VP. 1999 ISBN 0-7923-5462-145. K. Johnson and I. Roberts (eds.): Beyond Principles and Parameters. Essays in

Memory of Osvaldo Jaeggli. 1999 ISBN 0-7923-5501-646. R.M. Bhatt: Verb Movement and the Syntax of Kashmiri. 1999

ISBN 0-7923-6033-847. A. Neeleman and F. Weerman: Flexible Syntax. A Theory of Case and Argu-

ments. 1999 ISBN 0-7923-6058-348. C. Gerfen: Phonology and Phonetics in Coatzospan Mixtec. 1999

ISBN 0-7923-6034-649. I. Paul, V. Phillips and L. Travis (eds.): Formal Issues in Austronesian Linguis-

tics. 2000 ISBN 0-7923-6068-050. M. Frascarelli: The Syntax-Phonology Interface in Focus and Topic Construc-

tions in Italian. 2000 ISBN 0-7923-6240-351. I. Landau: Elements of Control. Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Construc-

tions. 2000 ISBN 0-7923-6620-452. W.D. Davies and S. Dubinsky (eds.): Objects and other Subjects. Grammatical

Functions, Functional Categories and Configurationality. 2001ISBN 1-4020-0064-2; Pb 1-4020-0065-0

53. J. Ouhalla and U. Shlonsky (eds.): Themes in Arabic and Hebrew Syntax. 2002ISBN 1-4020-0536-9; Pb 1-4020-0537-7

54. E. Haeberli: Features, Categories and the Syntax of A-Positions. Cross-LinguisticVariation in the Germanic Languages. 2002

ISBN 1-4020-0854-6; Pb 1-4020-0855-455. J. McDonough: The Navajo Sound System. 2003

ISBN 1-4020-1351-5; Pb 1-4020-1352-356. D.E. Holt (ed.): Optimality Theory and Language Change. 2003

ISBN 1-4020-1469-4; Pb 1-4020-1470-857. J. Camacho: The Structure of Coordination. Conjunction and Agreement Phe-

nomena in Spanish and Other Languages. 2003ISBN 1-4020-1510-0; Pb 1-4020-1511-9

58. I. Toivonen: Non-Projecting Words. A Case Study of Swedish Particles. 2003ISBN 1-4020-1531-3; Pb 1-4020-1532-1

59. D. Adger, C. de Cat and G. Tsoulas (eds). Peripheries. Syntactic Edges andtheir Effects. 2004 ISBN 1-4020-1908-4; Pb 1-4020-1909-2

60. C. Goria: Subject Clitics in the Northern Italian Dialects. A Comparative StudyBased on the Minimalist Program and Optimality Theory. 2004

ISBN 1-4020-2736-2; Pb 1-4020-2737-061. V. Dayal and A. Mahajan (eds.): Clause Structure in South Asian Languages.

2004 ISBN 1-4020-2717-6; Pb 1-4020-2718-462. P. Kempchinsky and R. Slabakova (eds.): Aspectual Inquiries. 2005

ISBN 1-4020-3032-0; Pb 1-4020-3035-5

springeronline.com