View Item 

Show simple item record

EPP in T: More Controversial Subjects
dc.contributor.authorEpstein, Samuel Daviden_US
dc.contributor.authorPires, Acrisioen_US
dc.contributor.authorSeely, T. Danielen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T19:09:57Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T19:09:57Z
dc.date.issued2005-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationEpstein, Samuel David; Pires, Acrisio; Seely, T. Daniel (2005). "EPP in T: More Controversial Subjects." Syntax 8(1): 65-80. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/72351>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1368-0005en_US
dc.identifier.issn1467-9612en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/72351
dc.format.extent116864 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.rights2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.titleEPP in T: More Controversial Subjectsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelLinguisticsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHumanitiesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumEastern Michigan University Linguistics Program Dept. of English Language and Literature Ypsilanti, MI 48197 USA tseely@emich.eduen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72351/1/j.1467-9612.2005.00075.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1467-9612.2005.00075.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceSyntaxen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceALLEN, M. 1978. Morphological investigations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceALEXIADOU, A. & A. ANAGNOSTOPOULOU. 1998. Parameterizing Agr: Word order, V-movement, and EPP-checking, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16: 491 – 531.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAN, D.-H. 2003. Sometimes in [Spec, CP] and sometimes not ? Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAN, D.-H. 2004. Clauses in non-canonical positions in PF. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceANDERSON, S. R. & D. W. LIGHTFOOT. 2002. The language organ: Linguistics as cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBELLETTI, A. 1988. The case of unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 1 – 34.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBERWICK, R. & S. D. EPSTEIN. 1995. On the convergence of ‘‘minimalist’’ syntax and Categorial Grammar. In Algebraic methods in language processing 1995: Proceedings of the twentieth Workshop on Language Technology 10. Enschede, the Netherlands: Universiteit Twente.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBOECKX, C. 2000. EPP eliminated. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBOŠKOVIć, Ž. 1997. The syntax of nonfinite complementation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBOŠKOVIć, Ž. 2002. A-movement and the EPP. Syntax 5: 167 – 218.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBOŠKOVIć, Ž. & H. LASNIK. 2003. On the distribution of null complementizers. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 527 – 546.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCASTILLO, J. C., J. DRURY & K. K. GROHMANN. 1999. Merge over Move and the Extended Projection Principle. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 66 – 103.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, ed. R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum, 184 – 221. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 1975. Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 1986. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka, 89 – 156. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 1 – 52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCHOMSKY, N. 2002. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Structures and beyond: Current issues in the theory of language, ed. A. Belletti, 104 – 131. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCONTRERAS, H. 2003. Wh -movement without intermediate traces. Ms., University of Washington, Seattle.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D. 1994. The derivation of syntactic relations. Ms., Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D. 1998. Overt scope marking and covert Verb Second. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 181 – 229.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D. 1999. Un-principled syntax and the derivation of syntactic relations. In Working minimalism, ed. S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein, 317 – 346. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D., E. GROAT, R. KAWASHIMA & H. KITAHARA. 1998. A derivational approach to syntactic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D., A. PIRES & T. D. SEELY. 2004. A theory of null complementizers and (the elimination of) the EPP in C. Ms., University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY. 1999. SPEC-ifying the GF ‘‘subject’’: Eliminating A-chains and the EPP within a derivational model. Ms., University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University; also presented at the LSA Summer Institute, 1999.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY, eds. 2002. Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program. Oxford: Blackwell.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEPSTEIN, S. D. & T. D. SEELY. Forthcoming. Derivations in minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFUKUI, N. & M. SPEAS. 1986. Specifiers and projection. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 8, ed. N. Fukui, T. R. Rapoport & E. Sagey, 128 – 172. Cambridge, Mass.: MITWPL.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGROHMANN, K. K., J. DRURY & J. C. CASTILLO. 2000. No more EPP. In Proceedings of the nineteenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. R. Billerey & B. D. Lillehaugen, 153 – 166. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHALE, K. & S. J. KEYSER. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The view from Building 20: Essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. K. Hale & S. J. Keyser, 53 – 108. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLASNIK, H. 1992. Case and expletives: Notes toward a parametric account. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 381 – 405.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLASNIK, H. 1995. Case and expletives revisited: On Greed and other human failings. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 615 – 633.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLASNIK, H. 1999. Syntactic structures revisited: Contemporary lectures on classic transformational grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLASNIK, H. 2001. A note on the EPP. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 356 – 361.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLASNIK, H. 2002. On the Extended Projection Principle. Ms., University of Maryland, College Park.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLASNIK, H. & J. URIAGEREKA. 1988. A course in GB syntax: Lectures on binding and empty categories. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLIGHTFOOT, D. 2002. The form of innateness claims. Paper presented at the Linguistics Department Colloquium, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMARTIN, R. 1999. Case, the EPP, and minimalism. In Working minimalism, ed. S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein, 1 – 26. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcCLOSKEY, J. 1997. Subjecthood and subject positions. In Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax, ed. L. Haegeman, 197 – 235. Dordrecht: Kluwer.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMORO, A. 1997. The raising of predicates: Predicative noun phrases and the theory of clause structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMYERS, S. 1984. Zero-derivation and inflection. In MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 7, ed. M. Speas & R. Sproat, 53 – 69. Cambridge, Mass.: MITWPL.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOrmazabal, J. 1995. The syntax of complementation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePESETSKY, D. 1991. Zero syntax: Part 2. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePESETSKY, D. & E. TORREGO. 2001. T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 355 – 426. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePESETSKY, D. & E. TORREGO. 2004. Tense, Case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In The syntax of time, ed. J. GuÉron & J. Lecarme, 495 – 537. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePIRES, A. 2001a. Clausal and TP-defective gerunds: Control without Tense. In Proceedings of NELS 31, ed. M. Kim & U. Strauss, 389 – 406. Amherst, Mass.: GLSA Publications.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePIRES, A. 2001b. The syntax of gerunds and infinitives: Subjects, Case and control. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceROTHSTEIN, S. 1983. The syntactic form of predication. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSTOWELL, T. 1981. Origins of phrase structure. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWILLIAMS, E. 1980. Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 208 – 238.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1467-9612.2005.00075.x.pdf
Size:
114.1KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.