Cover not available
Part of
Choosing a Grammar: Learning paths and ambiguous evidence in the acquisition of syntax
Isaac Gould
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 238] 2017

References

Abe, Jun
1993 Binding Conditions and Scrambling without A/A’ Distinction. PhD dissertation, The University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Ambridge, Ben, Pine, Julian M., Rowland, Caroline F., Jones, Rebecca L. & Clark, Victoria
2009 A semantics-based approach to the “no negative evidence” problem. Cognitive Science 33(7): 1301–1316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderssen, Merete, Bentzen, Kristine, Rodina, Yulia, & Westergaard, Marit
2011 The acquisition of apparent optionality: Word order in subject and object shift constructions in Norwegian. In Variation in the Input: Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, Merete Anderssen, Kristine Bentzen & Marit Westergaard (eds), 241–270. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, Martin
2001 Learnability and the acquisition of syntax. In Language Acquisition and Learnability, Stefano Bartolo (ed), 15–80. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon
1962 The order of elements in a transformational grammar of German. Language 38(3): 263–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark
2001 The Atoms of Language: The Mind’s Hidden Rules of Grammar. New York NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Berwick, Robert. C.
1986 Learning from positive-only examples: The Subset Principle and three case studies. In Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, Vol. 2, Ryszard. S. Michalski, Jaime. C. Carbonell & Tom. M. Mitchell (eds), 625–645. San Mateo CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa, Holmberg, Anders & Roberts, Ian
2014 A syntactic universal and its consequences. Linguistic Inquiry 45(2): 169–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanco, Mercedes Tubino
2010 Contrasting Causatives: A Minimalist Approach. PhD dissertation, The University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David
2000 The Rich Agreement Hypothesis in Review. Ms, McGill University.Google Scholar
2001 The implication of rich agreement: Why morphology doesn’t drive syntax. In Proceedings of the 20th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 20), Karin Megerdoomian & Leora Bar-el (eds), 82–95. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul
1997 How we learn variation, optionality, and probability. In Proceedings of the Institute of Phonetic Sciences 21, Rob J. J. H. van Son (ed), 43–58. Amsterdam: The University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit
2005 Structuring Sense, Vols. I & II. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, Melissa
1988 The ‘no negative evidence’ problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar? In Explaining Language Universals, J.A. Hawkins (ed), 73–101. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Boyd, Jeremy K. & Goldberg, Adele E.
2011 Learning what not to say: The role of statistical preemption and categorization in a-adjective production. Language 82(1): 55–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braine, Martin D. S.
1971 On two types of models of the internalization of grammars. In The Ontogenesis of Grammar: A theoretical Symposium, Daniel Slobin (ed), 153–186. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, Asudeh, Ash, Toivonen, Ida & Wechsler, Stephen
2016 Lexical-Functional Syntax. Malden MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cho, Sook Whan
1981 The Acquisition of Word Order in Korean. MA thesis, The University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Cho, Young-Mee Yu & Hong, Ki-Sun
1988 Evidence for the VP constituent from child Korean. In Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 27. Stanford CA: Department of Linguistics, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Cho, Sae-Youn
1993 Auxiliary verb constructions in Korean. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 23(2): 1–24.Google Scholar
Cho, Young-Mee Yu & Sells, Peter
1995 A lexical account of inflectional suffixes in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 4(2): 119–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choe, Hyon Sook
1987 Successive-cyclic rightward movement in Korean. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics, 2: Proceedings of the 1987 Harvard Workshop on Korean Linguistics, Susumu Kuno et al. (eds), 40–56. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Choi, Young-Sik
1999 Negation, its scope and NPI licensing in Korean. In ESCOL ’99, Rebecca Daly & Anastasia Riehl (eds), 25–36. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1956 Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions on Information Theory 2(3): 113–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1957 Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1980 Rules and Representations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1986 Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chung, Daeho
2005 What does bare –ko coordination say about post-verbal morphology in Korean? Lingua 115(4): 549–568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
1999 Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2006 Restructuring and Functional Heads: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 4 Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Clahsen, Harald
1982 Spracherwerb in der Kindheit: Eine Untersuchung zur Entwicklung der Syntax bei Kleinkindern. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Clahsen, Harald & Smolka, Klaus-Dirk
1986 Psycholinguistic evidence and the V-Second in German. In Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages, Hubert Haider & Martin Prinzhorn (eds), 137–167. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Robin
1989 On the relationship between the input data and parameter setting. In Proceedings of the Northeast Linguistic Society (NELS) 19, Juli Carter & Rose-Mari Déchaine (eds), 48–62. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
1992 The selection of syntactic knowledge. Language Acquisition 2(2): 85–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Robin & Roberts, Ian
1993 A computational model of language learnability and language change. Linguistic Inquiry 24(2): 299–345.Google Scholar
Crain, Stephen & Thornton, Rosalind
1998 Investigations into Universal Grammar: A Guide to Experiments in the Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Mark
2008–2015 The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 Million Words, 1990-present. [URL]
den Besten, Hans
1977 On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive verbs. Ms, MIT and Universiteit van Amsterdam. Appeared in den Besten (1989).Google Scholar
1989 Studies in West Germanic Syntax. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel
2006 A reappraisal of vP being phasal. Ms, CUNY Graduate Center.Google Scholar
Déprez, Viviane & Pierce, Amy
1993 Negation and functional projections in early grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 24(1): 25–67.Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly
1992 Indefinites. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Do, Young Ah
2013 Biased Learning of Phonological Alternations. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R
1979 Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S
1991 SVO languages and the OV/VO typology. Journal of Linguistics 27(2): 443–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David & Noyer, Ralf
2001 Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32(4): 555–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ernst, Thomas
2002 The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Fodor, Janet Dean
1998 Unambiguous triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 29(1): 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Jerry
1970 Three reasons for not deriving ‘kill’ from ‘cause to die’. Linguistic Inquiry 1(4): 429–438.Google Scholar
Folli, Raffaella & Harley, Heidi
2005 “Flavors of v: Consuming results in Italian and English. In Aspectual Inquiries, Roumyana Slabakova & Paula Kempchinsky (eds), 95–120. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foraker, Stephani, Regier, Terry, Khetarpal, Naveen, Perfors, Amy & Tenenbaum, Joshua
2009 Indirect evidence and the poverty of the stimulus: The case of anaphoric one . Cognitive Science 33(2): 287–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frank, Robert & Kapur, Shyam
1996 On the use of triggers in parameter setting. Linguistic Inquiry 27(4): 623–660.Google Scholar
Frigyik, Bela A., Kapila, Amol & Gupta, Maya R.
2010 Introduction to the Dirichlet distribution and related processes [UWEE Technical Report: Number UWEETR-2010–0006]. Seattle WA: Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Fukuda, Shin & Choi, Soonja
2009 The acquisition of transitivity in Japanese and Korean children. In Japanese and Korean Linguistics 17, Shoichi Iwasaki, Hajime Hoji, Patricia Clancy & Sung-Och Sohn (eds), 613–624. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Gawlitzek-Maiwald, Ira, Tracy, Rosemarie & Fritzenschaft, Agnes
1992 Language acquisition and competing linguistic representations: The child as arbiter. In The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition, Jürgen M. Meisel (ed), 139–179. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, Edward & Wexler, Ken
1994 Triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 25(3): 407–454.Google Scholar
Gold, E. Mark
1967 Language identification in the limit. Information and Control 10(5): 447–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
2011 Corpus evidence of the viability of statistical preemption. Cognitive Linguistics 22(1): 131–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Noah, Mansinghka, Vikash, Roy, Daiel, Bonawitz, Keith & Tenenbaum, Joshua
2008 Church: A language for generative models. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-08), David McAllester & Petri Myllymaki (eds), 220–229. Corvallis OR: AUAI Press.Google Scholar
de Haan, Germen & Weerman, Fred
1986 Finiteness and verb fronting in Frisian. In Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages, Hubert Haider & Martin Prinzhorn (eds), 77–110. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hagstrom, Paul
1995 Negation, Focus, and do-Support in Korean. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
2002 Implications of child errors for the syntax of negation in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11(3): 211–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haider, Hubert
2010 The Syntax of German. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Ken & Keyser, Samuel Jay
2002 Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Han, Chung-hye, Lidz, Jeffrey & Musolino, Julien
2007 V-raising and grammar competition in Korean: Evidence from negation and quantifier scope”. Linguistic Inquiry 38(1): 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Han, Chung-hye, Storoshenko, Dennis Ryan & Sakurai, Yasuko
2008 An experimental investigation into the placement of the verb in the clause structure of Japanese. In Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Linguistics in Korea (ICLK-2007). Seoul: The Linguistic Society of Korea.Google Scholar
Han, Chung-hye, Lidz, Jeffrey & Storoshenko, Dennis Ryan
2014 Variation in negation and quantifier scope judgments in Korean. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Vol. 2, Carissa Abrego-Collier, Arum Kang, Martina Martinović & Chieu Nguyen (eds), 65–76. Chicago IL: The Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Heim, Irene & Kratzer, Angelika
1998 Semantics in Generative Grammar. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, Teun & Hyams, Nina
1998 Aspects of root infintives. Lingua 106(1–4): 81–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders
2015 Verb second. In Syntax – Theory and Analysis: An International Handbook of Syntactic Research, Tibor Kiss & Artemis Alexiadou (eds), 342–382. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hsu, Anne S. & Griffiths, Thomas L.
2009 Differential use of implicit negative evidence in generative and discriminative language learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 22, Yoshua Bengio, Dale Schuurmans, John D. Lafferty, Christopher K. I. Williams & Aron Culotta (eds), 754–762.Google Scholar
Hyams, Nina
1986 Language Acquisition and the Theory of Parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Mark, Griffiths, Thomas L. & Goldwater, Sharon
2007 Bayesian inference for PCFGs via Markov Chain Monte Carlo. In Human Language Technologies 2007: The Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Main Conference, Candace Sidner, Tanja Schultz, Matthew Stone & ChengXiang Zhai (eds), 139–146. Stroudsburg PA: The Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Joo, Yanghee
1989 A Cross-linguistic Approach to Quantification in Syntax. PhD dissertation, The University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
Josefsson, Gunlög
1996[2013] The acquisition of object shift in Swedish child language. In Child Language, Vol. 9, Carolyn E. Johnson & John H. V. Gilbert (eds), 153–165. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard
1994 The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kemp, Charles, Perfors, Amy & Tenenbaum, Joshua
2007 Learning overhypotheses with hierarchical Bayesian models. Developmental Science 10(3): 307–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Young-Joo
1997 The acquisition of Korean. In The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Vol. 4, Dan Isaac Slobin (ed), 335–443. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
2000 Subject/Object drop in the acquisition of Korean: A cross-linguistic comparison. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 9(4): 325–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward & Bellugi, Ursula
1966 Syntactic regularities in the speech of children. In Psycholinguistic Papers, John Lyons & Roger Wales (eds), 183–208. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Koizumi, Masatoshi
2000 String vacuous overt verb-raising. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 9(3): 227–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koopman, Hilda
2005 Korean (and Japanese) morphology from a syntactic perspective. Linguistic Inquiry 36(4): 601–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koster, Jan
1975 Dutch as an SOV language. Linguistic Analysis 1: 111–136.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1996 Severing the external argument from the verb. In Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, Johann Rooryck & Zaring, Laurie (eds), 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Kai, Berryman, Joshua T., Taudt, Aaron, Zeman, Johannes & Arnold, Alex
2014 The Flexible Rare Event Sampling Harness System (FRESHS). Computer Physics Communications 185(7): 1875–1885. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony
1989 Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1(3): 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuroda, Shige-Yuki
1970 Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Laplace, Pierre-Simon
1825 Philosophical Essay on Probabilities, translated by Andrew I. Dale (1995) from the fifth French edition. New York NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Lee, Jae Hong
1993 Postverbal adverbs and verb movement in Korean. In Japanese/Korean Linguistics 2, Patricia Marie Clancy & Hajime Hoji (eds), 429–446. Stanford CA: SLA/CSLI.Google Scholar
Lee, Jungmee
2008 The temporal interpretation of the Korean –ko construction: Aktionsart and Discourse Context. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 12, Atle Grønn (ed), 367–383. Oslo.Google Scholar
Lee, Jungmee & Tonhauser, Judith
2010 Temporal interpretation without tense: Korean and Japanese coordination constructions. Journal of Semantics 27(3): 307–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne
2003 Some interface properties of the phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34(3): 506–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne & Yang, Charles
2007 Morphosyntactic learning and the development of tense. Language Acquisition 14(3): 315–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka
1995 Unaccusativity. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lightfoot David
1989 The child’s trigger experience: Degree-0 learnability. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12(2): 321–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightfoot, David
1991 How to Set Parameters: Arguments from Language Change. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1997 Shifting triggers and diachronic reanalysis. In Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change, Ans van Kemenade & Nigel Vincent (eds), 253–272. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian
2000 The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk, 3rd edn. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Magri, Giorgio
2013 HG has no computational advantages over OT: Toward a new toolkit for computational OT. Linguistic Inquiry 44(4): 569–609. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec
1988 Clitics, morphological merger, and the mapping to phonological structure. In Theoretical Morphology: Approaches in Modern Linguistics, Michael Hammond & Michael Noonan (eds), 253–270. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1997 No escape from syntax: Don’t attempt morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4(2): 201–225.Google Scholar
Meinunger, André
2007 About object es in the German vorfeld . Linguistic Inquiry 38(3): 553–563. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, Anne E.
1985 The acquisition of German. In The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Vo1. 1: The Data, Dan Isaac Slobin (ed), 141–254. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru
2001 The EPP, scrambling, and wh-in-situ. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed), 293–338. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Müller, Natascha
1993 Komplexe Sätze: Der Erwerb von Comp und von Wortstellungsmustern bei Bilingualen Kindern (Französisch/Deutsch). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Netter, Klaus
1992 On non-head non-movement. In KONVENS 92, Günter Görz (ed), 218–227. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Otani, Kazuyo & Whitman, John
1991 V-raising and VP-ellipsis. Linguistics Inquiry 22(2): 345–358.Google Scholar
Park, Myung-Kan
1994 A Morpho-Syntactic Study of Korean Verbal Inflection. PhD dissertation, The University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Parsons, Terence
1990 Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Payne, John, Pullum, Geoffrey K., Scholz, Barabara C. & Berlage, Eva
2013 Anaphoric one and its implications. Language 89(4): 794–829. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearl, Lisa
2007 Necessary Bias in Natural Language Learning. PhD dissertation, The University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Pearl, Lisa & Goldwater, Sharon
2016 Statistical learning, inductive bias, and Bayesian inference in language acquisition. In The Oxford Handbook of Developmental Linguistics, Jeffrey Lidz, William Snyder & Joe Pater (eds), 664–695. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Pearl, Lisa & Lidz, Jeffrey
2009 When domain-general learning fails and when it succeeds: Identifying the contribution of domain specificity. Language Learning and Development 5(4): 235–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearl, Lisa & Mis, Benjamin
2011 How far can indirect evidence take us? Anaphoric one revisited. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2011), Laura Carlson, Christoph Hoelscher & Thomas F. Shipley (eds), 879–884. Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
2016 The role of indirect positive evidence in syntactic acquisition. Language 92(1): 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Penner, Zvi
1990 On the acquisition of verb placement and Verb Projection Raising in Bernese Swiss German. In Spracherwerv und Grammatik: Linguistische Untersuchungen zum Erwerb von Syntax und Morphologie, Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 3, Monika Rothweiler (ed), 166–189. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 From Empty to Doubly-Filled Complementizers: A Case Study in the Acquisition of Subordination in Bernese Swiss German [Arbeitspapier Nr. 77]. Konstanz: Fachgruppe Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Konstanz.Google Scholar
Perfors, Amy, Tenenbaum, Joshua & Regier, Terry
2006 Poverty of the stimulus? A rational approach. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2006), Ron Sun & Naomi Miyake (eds), 663–668. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Perfors, Amy, Tenenbaum, Joshua B. & Gibson, Edward & Regier, Terry
2010a How recursive is language? A Bayesian exploration. In Recursion and Human Language, Harry van der Hulst (ed), 159–175. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perfors, Amy, Tenenbaum, Joshua B. & Wonnacott, Elizabeth
2010b Variability, negative evidence, and the acquisition of verb argument constructions. Journal of Child Language 37(3): 607–642. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perfors, Amy, Tenenbaum, Joshua B. & Regier, Terry
2011 The learnability of abstract syntactic principles. Cognition 118(3): 306–338. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, David
1978 Impersonal passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis. In Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 4, 157–189. Berkeley CA: The University of California.Google Scholar
Pierce, Amy
1992 Language Acquisition and Syntactic Theory: A Comparative Analysis of French and English Child Grammars. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven
2013[1989] Learnability and Cognition. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan
2002 Verb-object order in Old English: Variation as grammatical competition. In Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, David Lightfoot (ed), 276–300. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Platzack, Christer
1986 Comp, Infl, and Germanic word order. In Topics in Scandinavian Syntax, Lars Hellan & Kristi Koch (eds), 185–234. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves
1989 Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20(3): 365–424.Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, Liina
2008 Introducing Arguments. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian Catriona
2008 Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First-Phase Syntax. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Regier, Terry & Gahl, Susanne
2004 Learning the unlearnable: The role of missing evidence. Cognition 93(2): 147–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1993/1994 Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: The case of Root Infinitives. Language Acquisition 3(4): 371–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian
1997 Directionality and word order change in the history of English. In Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change, Ans van Kemenade & Nigel Vincent (eds), 397–426. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Rosengren, Inger
2002 EPP: A syntactic device in the service of semantics. Studia Linguistica 56(2): 145–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, John Robert
1967 Constraints on Variables in Syntax. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Rothweiler, Monika
1993 Der Erwerb von Nebensätzen in Deutschen: Eine Pilotstudie. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Safir, Ken
1987 Comments on Wexler and Manzini. In Parameter Setting, Thomas Roeper & Edwin Williams (eds), 77–90. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sag, Ivan A., Wasow, Thomas & Bender, Emily M.
2003 Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Sakas, William Gregory
2003 A word-order database for testing computational models of language acquisition. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL ’03), Vol. 1, Erhard W. Hinrichs & Dan Roth (eds), 415–422. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Sakas, William Gregory & Dean Fodor, Janet
2001 The structural triggers learner. In Language Acquisition and Learnability, Stefano Bartolo (ed), 172–233. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Disambiguating syntactic triggers. Language Acquisition 19(2): 83–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schönenberger, Manuela
2001 Embedded V-to-C in Child Grammar: The Acquisition of Verb Placement in Swiss German. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Three acquisition puzzles and the relation between input and output. In First Language Acquisition of Morphology and Syntax [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 45], Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes, María Pilar Larrañaga & John Clibbens (eds), 87–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie & Vikner, Sten
1996 The verb always leaves IP in V2 clauses. In Parameters and Functional Heads: Essays in Comparative Syntax, Adriana Belletti & Luigi Rizzi (eds), 11–62. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Schweikert, Walter
2005 The Order of Prepositional Phrases in the Structure of the Clause [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 83]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sells, Peter
1995 Korean and Japanese morphology from a lexical perspective. Linguistic Inquiry 26(2): 277–325.Google Scholar
2001 Structure, Alignment, and Optimality in Swedish. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Snyder, William
2007 Child Language: The Parametric Approach. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Stowell, Timothy
1981 Origins of Phrase Structure. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Stromswold, Karin
1990 Learnability and the Acquisition of Auxiliaries. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Takano, Yuji
2002 Surprising constituents. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11(3): 243–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tenny, Carol L.
2000 Core events and adverbial modification. In Events as Grammatical Objects, Carol L. Tenny & James Pustejovsky (eds), 285–334. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Travis, Lisa deMena
1984 Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Vecchiato, Antonella
2011 Events in the Grammar of Direct and Indirect Causation. PhD dissertation, The University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Waldmann, Christian
2011 Moving in small steps towards Verb Second: A case study. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 34(3): 331–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 The acquisition of Neg-V and V-Neg order in embedded clauses in Swedish: A microparametric approach. Language Acquisition 21(1): 45–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit R.
2006 Triggering V2: The amount of input needed for parameter setting in a Split-CP model. In Language Acquisition and Development: Proceedings of GALA 2005, Adriana Belletti, Elisa Bennati, Cristiano Chesi, Elisa DiDomenico & Ida Ferrari (eds), 564–577. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Westergaard, Marit
2009 Usage-based vs. rule-based learning: The acquisition of word order in wh-questions in English and Norwegian. Journal of Child Language 36(5): 1023–1051. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wexler, Kenneth
1998 Very early parameter setting and the Unique Checking Constraint: A new explanation of the Optional Infinitive stage. Lingua 106: 23–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Grammatical computation in the Optional Infinitive stage. In Handbook of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition, Jill de Villiers & Thomas Roeper (eds), 53–118. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wexler, Kenneth & Manzini, M. Rita
1987 Parameters and learnability in Binding Theory. In Parameter Setting, Thomas Roeper & Edwin Williams (eds), 41–76. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Colin
2006 Learning phonology with substantive bias: An experimental and computational study of velar palatalization. Cognitive Science 30(5): 945–982. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi
2005 Verb clusters, Verb Raising and Restructuring. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Vol. 5, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 227–341. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Yang, Charles
2002 Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Yoon, James Hye Suk
1994 Korean verbal inflection and Checking Theory. In The Morphology-Syntax Connection [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 22], Heidi Harley & Colin Phillips (eds), 251–270. Cambridge MA: MIT.Google Scholar
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter
1997 The Morphosyntax of Verb Movement: A Minimalist Approach to Dutch syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar