“Gap” matters: reflections on the notion of “gap” of relative clauses

References

Abondolo, Daniel. 1998. Introduction. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 1–42. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity versus economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21(3). 435–483. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024109008573.10.1023/A:1024109008573Search in Google Scholar

Asbury, Anna. 2008. The morphosyntax of case and adpositions. Utrecht: Utrecht University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Bacskai-Atkari, Julia. 2018. Deletion phenomena in comparative constructions: English comparatives in a cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: Language Science Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ball, Rodney. 2000. Colloquial French grammar: A practical guide. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.Search in Google Scholar

Berwick, Robert & Noam Chomsky. 2017. Why only us: Recent questions and answers. Journal of Neurolinguistics 43. 166–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.12.002.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatt, Rajesh. 2002. The raising analysis of relative clauses: Evidence from adjectival modification. Natural Language Semantics 10(1). 43–90. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015536226396.10.1023/A:1015536226396Search in Google Scholar

Bianchi, Valentina. 1999. Consequences of antisymmetry: Headed relative clauses. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110803372Search in Google Scholar

Birner, Betty & Gregory Ward. 1998. Information status and noncanonical word order in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.40Search in Google Scholar

Birner, Betty & Gregory Ward. 2019. The interaction of topicalization and left-dislocation in English. Anglophonia 28. https://doi.org/10.4000/anglophonia.2801.Search in Google Scholar

Blanche-Benveniste, Claire. 2000. Approches de la langue parlée en français. Paris: Ophrys.Search in Google Scholar

Blanche-Benveniste, Claire. 2003. La langue parlée. In Marina Yaguello (ed.), Le grand livre de la langue française, 317–344. Paris: Seuil.Search in Google Scholar

Bossong, Georg. 1985. Empirische Universalienforschung: Differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Bossong, Georg. 1997. Le Marquage Différentiel de L’Objet dans les Langues d’Europe. In Jack Feuillet (ed.), Actance et Valence dans les Langues d’Europe, 193–258. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110804485.193Search in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan. 1973. Syntax of the comparative clause construction in English. Linguistic Inquiry 4(3). 275–343.Search in Google Scholar

Caha, Pavel. 2009. The nanosyntax of case. Tromsø: University of Tromsø dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Cecchetto, Carlo & Caterina Donati. 2015. (Re)labelling. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262028721.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and point of view. In Charles Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 27–55. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2005. Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2006. Language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, Guglielmo. 2019. The syntax of relative clauses: A unified analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108856195Search in Google Scholar

Citko, Barbara. 2001. Deletion under identity in relative clauses. Proceedings of the NELS 31(1). 131–145.Search in Google Scholar

Creissels, Denis. 2006. Syntaxe générale: une introduction typologique. Paris: Hermès.Search in Google Scholar

Creissels, Denis. 2019. Remarks on the typology of noun-modifying clause constructions. Paper presented at the Conference of Complex Sentences, Central China Normal University, 26–29 July.Search in Google Scholar

de Vries, Mark. 2002. The syntax of relativization. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 2010. Basic linguistic theory. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199571055.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Gadet, Françoise. 1992. Le français populaire. Paris: PUF.10.3406/linx.1991.1227Search in Google Scholar

Gadet, Françoise. 1997. Le français ordinaire. Paris: Armand Colin.Search in Google Scholar

Givón, Talmy. 2001. Syntax: An introduction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.synsSearch in Google Scholar

Grosu, Alexander. 2002. Strange relatives at the interface of two millenia. Glot International 6(6). 145–167.Search in Google Scholar

Hagège, Claude. 2010. Adpositions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199575008.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Handschuh, Corinna. 2014. A typology of marked-S languages. Berlin: Language Science Press.10.26530/OAPEN_533871Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110884210Search in Google Scholar

Hewitt, George. 2004. Introduction to the study of the languages of the Caucasus. Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar

Hole, Daniel. 2015. Arguments and adjuncts. In Tibor Kiss & Artemis Alexiadou (eds.), Syntax-theory and analysis, vol. 2, 1284–1320. Berlin, München & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110363708-014Search in Google Scholar

Jäger, Agnes. 2019. The syntax of comparison constructions in diachronic and dialectal perspective. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 4(1). 70. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.651.Search in Google Scholar

Kangasmaa-Minn, Eeva. 1998. Mari. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 219–248. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Keenan, Edward & Bernard Comrie. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8(1). 63–99.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. 2002. Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20(4). 553–621. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015889823361.10.1023/A:1015889823361Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher & Jason Merchant. 2000. Attributive comparative deletion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18(1). 89–146. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006362716348.10.1023/A:1006362716348Search in Google Scholar

Kennette, Lynne & Lee Wurm. 2016. On the disambiguation of meaning and the effect of cognitive load. Current Psychology 35(4). 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-014-9294-6.Search in Google Scholar

König, Christa. 2008. Case in Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199232826.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kroeger, Paul. 2004. Analyzing syntax: A lexical-functional approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511801693Search in Google Scholar

Lechner, Winfried. 2004. Ellipsis in comparatives. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110197402Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian. 1986. On the typology of relative clauses. Linguistics 24(4). 663–680. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1986.24.4.663.Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian. 2003. Relative clauses. In William Frawley (ed.), International encyclopedia of linguistics, 460–461. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Matsumura, Kazuto. 1981. Mari (Cheremis) relative clauses. Working Papers in Linguistics 81. 45–55.Search in Google Scholar

Miller, Jim. 1993. The grammar of Scottish English syntax. In James Milroy & Lesley Milroy (eds.), Real English: The grammar of English dialects in the British Isles, 99–138. London: Longman Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Munn, Alan. 1994. A minimalist account of reconstruction asymmetries. Proceedings of the NELS 24(1). 397–410.Search in Google Scholar

Olawsky, Knut. 2006. A grammar of Urarina. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110892932Search in Google Scholar

Prince, Ellen. 1997. On the functional of left-dislocation in English discourse. In Akio Kamio (ed.), Directions in functional linguistics, 117–144. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.36.08priSearch in Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Radford, Andrew. 2019. Relative clauses: Structures and variation in everyday English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108687744Search in Google Scholar

Salzmann, Martin. 2006. Resumptive prolepsis: A study in indirect A’-dependencies. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar

Sauerland, Uli. 2003. Unpronounced heads in relative clauses. In Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds.), The interfaces: Deriving and interpreting omitted structures, 205–226. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/la.61.10sauSearch in Google Scholar

Shi, Ding-Xu. 2000. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 76(2). 383–408. https://doi.org/10.2307/417661.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Jae-Jung. 2001. Linguistic typology: Morphology and syntax. Harlow: Pearson Education.Search in Google Scholar

Takami, Ken-ichi. 1992. Preposition stranding: From syntactic to functional analyses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110870398Search in Google Scholar

van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness: The binding nature of prepositional phrases. Dordrecht: Foris.Search in Google Scholar

Vergnaud, Jean-Roger. 1974. French relative clauses. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Ward, Gregory. 1988. The semantics and pragmatics of preposing. New York: Garland.Search in Google Scholar

Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena & Ilja Seržant. 2018. Differential argument marking: Patterns of variation. In Alena Witzlack-Makarevich & Ilja Seržant (eds.), Diachrony of differential argument marking, 1–40. Berlin: Language Science Press.Search in Google Scholar