Part of
Non-canonical Control in a Cross-linguistic Perspective
Edited by Anne Mucha, Jutta M. Hartmann and Beata Trawiński
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 270] 2021
► pp. 167194
Barbosa, Pilar
2018Controlled overt pronouns as specificational predicates. In Complement Clauses in Portuguese: Syntax and Acquisition. Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 17], Ana Lúcia Santos & Anabela Gonçalves (eds), 129–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartos, Huba
2002Root infinitives. In Approaches to Hungarian 8, István Kenesei & Péter Siptár (eds), 13–38. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Bhatt, Rajesh
2006Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burukina, Irina
2020Mandative verbs and deontic modals in Russian: Between obligatory control and overt embedded subjects. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 5(1): 54. 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalmi, Gréte
2004The Role of AGRP in Non-finite Predication. PhD dissertation, ELTE University.Google Scholar
2020The argument structure of BE-possessives in Hungarian. In Approaches to Predicative Possession, Gréte Dalmi, Jacek Witkoś & Piotr Cegłowski (eds), 136–161. London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel
2018Dependency and Directionality. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin
1998Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74: 245–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002The Syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014Ways of licensing external possessors. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61(1): 45–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosu, Alexander
2004The syntax-semantics of modal existential wh- constructions. In Balkan Syntax and Semantics [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 67], Olga Mišeska Tomić (ed.), 405–438. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kenesei, István
2001Criteria for auxiliaries in Hungarian. In Argument Structure in Hungarian, István Kenesei (ed.), 73–106. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
2005Nonfinite clauses in derived nominals. In Approaches to Hungarian 9, Christopher Piñón & Péter Siptár (eds), 161–186, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan
2015A Two-tiered Theory of Control. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipták, Anikó
2003Hungarian Modal Existential Wh-constructions. Ms, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Livitz, Inna
2013Deriving Silence through Dependent Reference: Focus on Pronouns. PhD dissertation, New York University.Google Scholar
Pancheva-Izvorski, Roumyana
2000Free Relatives and Related Matters. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Prohászka, Zsolt
2019Van Marinak csak Pétertől mit ellopni – A modális egzisztenciális kérdőszói konstrukció a magyarban (Modal existential wh-constructions in Hungarian). Ms, University of Pécs.Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, Liina
2008Introducing Arguments. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rackowski, Andrea & Norvin, Richards
2005Phase edge and extraction: A Tagalog case study. Linguistic Inquiry 36(4): 565–599. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rooryck, Johan & Postma, Gertjan
2007On participial imperatives. In Imperative Clauses in Generative Grammar [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 106], Wim van der Wurff (ed.), 273–296. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Šimík, Radek
2011Modal Existential Wh-constructions. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
2013aThe PRO-wh connection in modal existential wh-constructions. An argument in favor of semantic control. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31:1163–1205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013bModal existential wh-constructions as affordance descriptions. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 17, Emmanuel Chemla, Vincent Homer & Grégoire Winterstein (eds), 563–580. [URL]> (30 January 2021)
Surányi, Balázs
2002Multiple Operator Movements in Hungarian. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
2005Indefinite wh-pronouns and the modal existential wh-constructions in Hungarian. Abstract from the 7th International Conference on the Structure of Hungarian (ICSH7), Veszprém, May 2005.
Szabolcsi, Anna
1986From the definiteness effect to lexical integrity. In Topic, Focus, and Configurationality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 4], Werner Abraham & Sjaak de Meij (eds), 321–348. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005Overt infinitival subjects (if that’s what they are). In Organizing Grammar, Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver, Riny Huijbregts, Ursula Kleinhenz & Jan Koster (eds), 618–625. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2009aOvert nominative subjects in infinitival complements in Hungarian. In Approaches to Hungarian, Vol. 11: Papers from the 2007 New York Conference, Marcel den Dikken & Robert Vago (eds), 251–276. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009bOvert nominative subjects in infinitival complements cross-linguistically. In NYU WPL in Syntax, Irwin Rojas & Vázquez Rojas (eds). [URL]> (30 January 2021)
Szécsényi, Krisztina
2009On the double nature of Hungarian infinitival constructions. Lingua 119(4): 592–624. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018aPostverbal-only focus as evidence for biclausal structure in Hungarian. Jezikoslovlje 19(3): 481–508.Google Scholar
2018bControl and the left periphery: The scope and information structure properties of Hungarian infinitival complements with nominative, dative, and covert subjects. In Boundaries Crossed, at the Interfaces of Morphosyntax, Phonology, Pragmatics and Semantics [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 94], Huba Bartos, Marcel den Dikken, Zoltán Bánréti & Tamás Váradi (eds), 279–295. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018cInfinitival clauses with nominative subjects in European Portuguese and Hungarian: Only pronouns? In Para Óscar Lopes: Estudos de Linguística, Fátima Oliveira, António Leal, Fátima Silva & Purificação Silvano (eds), 215–239. Porto: Afrontamento.Google Scholar
Szécsényi, Krisztina & Szécsényi, Tibor
2017Definiteness agreement in Hungarian multiple infinitival constructions. In Language Use and Linguistic Structure. Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistic Colloquium 2016, Joseph Emonds & Marketa Janebova (eds), 75–89. Olomouc: Palacky University.Google Scholar
2019I agrees with you: Object agreement and permissive hagy in Hungarian. In Language Use and Linguistic Structure. Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistics Colloquium 2018, Joseph Emonds, Markéta Janebová & Ludmila Veselovská (eds), 79–97. Olomouc: Palacký University.Google Scholar
Tabatowski, Michael
2020Exceptional wh-movement: The case of the Hungarian modal-existential construction. In Proceedings of the 19th Meeting of the Texas Linguistics Society, Caitlin Coons, Zhe-Chen Guo, Seyeon Park & Elizabeth Wood (eds), 62–79. [URL]> (30 January 2021)
Tóth, Ildikó
2000Inflected Infinitives in Hungarian. PhD dissertation, Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi
2001Infinitives. Restructuring and Clause Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2002Syntactic versus semantic control. In Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax. Proceedings from the 15th Workshop on Comparative Germanic Syntax (Groningen, May 26–27, 2000) [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 53], C. Jan-Wouter Zwart & Werner Abraham (eds), 93–127. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo