Différences entre les versions de « Rezac (2013) »

De Arbres
(7 versions intermédiaires par 2 utilisateurs non affichées)
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
* Rezac, M. 2009. 'The Breton double subject construction', Recueil en hommage à Jean-Pierre Angoujard, PUR. - version avant édition: [http://www.umr7023.cnrs.fr/sites/sfl/IMG/pdf/DoubleSU.final.pdf pdf]
* Rezac, M. 2013. 'The Breton double subject construction', Ali Tifrit (éd.), ''Phonologie, Morphologie, Syntaxe Mélanges offerts à Jean-Pierre Angoujard'', PUR, 355-379. - version 2009 avant édition: [http://www.umr7023.cnrs.fr/sites/sfl/IMG/pdf/DoubleSU.final.pdf pdf].




   Introduction:
   '''Introduction''':
    
    
   This widespread construction has its place in most grammars of the
   This widespread construction has its place in most grammars of the language, and it is studied in depth by Urien (1989 [[Urien (1989a)|a]], [[Urien (1989b)|b]]) and [[Hendrick (1988)]]. There is an anologue in Irish, McCloskey and Sells (1988), Ó Baoill and Maki (2007), and others perhaps farther afield, Doron and Heycock (1999).  
  language, and it is studied in depth by Urien (1989 [[Urien (1989a)|a]], [[Urien (1989b)|b]]) and [[Hendrick (1988)]].  
 
  There is an anologue in Irish, McCloskey and Sells (1988), Ó Baoill and  
   Yet, if it is truly a [[Wsc|double subject construction]] rather than a more commonplace one such as [[dislocation]], it corresponds to nothing in English or French, and theories of their syntax are designed to block it. Thus its linguistic interest.  
  Maki (2007), and others perhaps farther afield, Doron and Heycock (1999).  
   Yet, if it is truly a double subject construction rather than a more  
  commonplace one such as dislocation, it corresponds to nothing in English  
  or French, and theories of their syntax are designed to block it.  
  Thus its linguistic interest.  





Version du 3 mars 2017 à 16:20

  • Rezac, M. 2013. 'The Breton double subject construction', Ali Tifrit (éd.), Phonologie, Morphologie, Syntaxe Mélanges offerts à Jean-Pierre Angoujard, PUR, 355-379. - version 2009 avant édition: pdf.


 Introduction:
 
 This widespread construction has its place in most grammars of the language, and it is studied in depth by Urien (1989 a, b) and Hendrick (1988). There is an anologue in Irish, McCloskey and Sells (1988), Ó Baoill and Maki (2007), and others perhaps farther afield, Doron and Heycock (1999). 
 
 Yet, if it is truly a double subject construction rather than a more commonplace one such as dislocation, it corresponds to nothing in English or French, and theories of their syntax are designed to block it. Thus its linguistic interest. 


Références

  • Doron, Edit, and Caroline Heycock. 1999. 'Filling and licensing multiple specifiers', David Adger, Susan Pintzuk, Bernadette Plunkett, and George Tsoulas (éds.), Specifiers: Minimalist approaches, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 69-89.
  • McCloskey, James, and Peter Sells. 1988. 'Control and A-chains in Modern Irish', Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6: 143-189.
  • Ó Baoill, Dónall, and Hideki Maki. 2007. 'A Paradox in Interaction of A and A' Chain Formation in Modern Irish', Paper presented at the Fifth Celtic Linguistic Conference, Plas Gregynog, September 7-9, 2007.