Multidominance and locality

Vries, Mark de

doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.005

Cited by 36 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This requirement that a structure has only one root in the end also constrains the use of multidominance. I also adhere to a stronger version of this condition, which says that Merge may never increase the number of roots during the derivation (see De Vries, 2009b).…”

Section: Multidominancementioning

confidence: 99%

A multidominance approach to appositional constructions

Heringa

2012

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Multidominancementioning

confidence: 99%

A multidominance approach to appositional constructions

Heringa

2012

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Alternative but equivalent data structures are trace chain structures or copy chain structures, as shown in Figure 2 3 . Although it is more standard to use structures with copies (although see, among others, Starke 2001, Gärtner 2002, Zhang 2004, Citko 2005, and de Vries 2009), the multiple domination representation seems most faithful to Chomsky's admonition against treating copies as distinct and will allow us to state our conditions on deletion most simply.…”

Section: The Proposalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Acceptability Cline in VP Ellipsis

Kim

Kobele

Runner

et al. 2011

Syntax

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper lays the foundations for a processing model of relative acceptability levels in verb phrase ellipsis (VPE). In the proposed model, mismatching VPE examples are grammatical but less acceptable because they violate heuristic parsing strategies. This analysis is presented in a Minimalist Grammar formalism that is compatible with standard parsing techniques. The overall proposal integrates computational assumptions about parsing with a psycholinguistic linking hypothesis. These parts work together with the syntactic analysis to derive novel predictions that are confirmed in a controlled experiment.

show abstract

“…Since it is unclear how this powerful mechanism can be properly constrained (but see De Vries 2009), I take it to be a virtue of the present proposal that it avoids such complications. In the (a) examples, extraction presupposes probing into a DP containing a previously transferred CP.…”

Section: Empirical Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Note on Free Relative Clauses in the Theory of Phases

Ott

2011

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Steriade, Donca. 2008. The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. In The nature of the word: Studies in honor of Paul Kiparsky, ed. by Kristin Hanson and Sharon Inkelas, 151-180. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Originally circulated in 2001.) Wang, William S.-Y. 1968. Vowel features, paired variables, and the English vowel shift. Language 44:695-708. Webb, Charlotte. 1982. A constraint on progressive consonantal assimilation. Linguistics 20:309-321. Wilkinson, Robert W. 1974. A phonetic constraint on a syncope rule in Telugu. Language 50:478-497. Wilson, Colin. 2001. Consonant cluster neutralization and targeted constraints.

show abstract

Multidominance and locality

Cited by 36 publications

References 20 publications

A multidominance approach to appositional constructions

A multidominance approach to appositional constructions

The Acceptability Cline in VP Ellipsis

A Note on Free Relative Clauses in the Theory of Phases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About