Book contents
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I The Science of Language: Recent Change and Progress
- 1 The Locality of Transformational Movement: Progress and Prospects
- 2 Is the Faculty of Language a “Perfect Solution” to the Interface Systems?
- 3 On Merge
- 4 A Feeling for the Phenotype
- 5 The Generative Word
- 6 Third Factors in Language Design: Some Suggestions from Quantum Field Theory
- Part II The Human Mind and Its Study
- Part III Chomsky on Politics and Economics
- Index
- References
5 - The Generative Word
from Part I - The Science of Language: Recent Change and Progress
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 July 2017
By
Edited by
Book contents
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I The Science of Language: Recent Change and Progress
- 1 The Locality of Transformational Movement: Progress and Prospects
- 2 Is the Faculty of Language a “Perfect Solution” to the Interface Systems?
- 3 On Merge
- 4 A Feeling for the Phenotype
- 5 The Generative Word
- 6 Third Factors in Language Design: Some Suggestions from Quantum Field Theory
- Part II The Human Mind and Its Study
- Part III Chomsky on Politics and Economics
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky , pp. 110 - 133Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Alexiadou, Artemis, Borer, Hagit, and Schäfer, Florian, eds. 2015. The Roots of Syntax, the Syntax of Roots. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 1985. “The Mirror Principle and Morphosyntactic Explanation.” Linguistic Inquiry 16:373–416.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 2013. Taking Form, Structuring Sense. Vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague/Paris: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1970. “Remarks on Nominalization.” In Jacobs, R. A. and Rosenbaum, P. S., eds. Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham, MA: Ginn. 184–221.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. “Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework.” In Martin, R., Michaels, D., and Uriagereka, J., eds. Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. “Derivation by Phase.” In Kenstowitz, M., ed. Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–52.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2015. “Problems of Projection: Extensions.” In Di Domenico, E., Hamann, C., and Matteini, S., eds. Structures, Strategies and Beyond, Studies in Honour of Adriana Belletti. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve and Clark, Herbert. 1979. “When Nouns Surface as Verbs.” Language 55:767–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1967. “The Logical Form of Action Sentences.” In Rescher, N., ed. The Logic of Decision and Action. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiSciullo, Anna Maria and Williams, Edwin. 1987. On the Definition of Word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Kay, Paul, and O’Connor, Mary Catherine. 1988. “Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone.” Language 64:501–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 1994. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1979. “Complement Selection and the Lexicon.” Linguistic Inquiry 10:279–326.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, S. Jay. 1993. “On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of Syntactic Relations.” In Hale, Kenneth and Jay Keyser, S., eds. The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 53–110.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1973. “Prolegomena to a Theory of Word Formation.” Linguistic Inquiry 4:3–16.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1975. “Morphological and Semantic Regularities in the Lexicon.” Language 51:639–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. “Severing the External Argument from the Verb.” In Rooryck, Johan and Zaring, Laurie, eds. Phrase Structure and the Lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 109–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapointe, Steven. 1980. A Theory of Grammatical Agreement. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth. 2011. “The Lexicon Project and Its Legacy.” PowerPoint presentation, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Terence. 1990. Events in the Semantics of English. A Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David. 1983. Studies in Relational Grammar 1. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Roeper, Thomas and van Hout., Angeliek 2009. “The Representation of Movement in –ability Nominalizations: Evidence for Covert Category Movement, Edge Phenomena, and Local LF.” In Giannakidou, A. and Rathert, M., eds. Quantification, Definiteness, and Nominalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 344–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasow, Tom. 1977. “Transformations and the Lexicon.” In Culicover, P. W., Wasow, T., and Akmajian, A., eds. Formal Syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1981. “Argument Structure and Morphology.” The Linguistic Review 1:81–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11
- Cited by