Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:25:02.370Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Journal of Linguistics - Martin Harris, The evolution of French syntax. A comparative approach. (Longman Linguistics Library 22.) London: Longman, 1978. Pp. x + 268.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Jurgen Klausenburger
Jurgen Klausenburger
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , March 1982 , pp. 176 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, E. (1979). The development of the Romance future tense: Morphologization II and a tendency toward analyticity. Papers in Romance I (1). 21–35.Google Scholar
Ashby, W. (1977). Clitic inflection in French. An historical perspective. Amsterdam: Rodopi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, W.E. (1960). Time, tense, and the verb: a study in theoretical and applied linguistics with particular attention to Spanish. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cannings, P. (1978). Interlocking binding and relativisation strategies. Studies in French linguistics I (1). 1–40.Google Scholar
Haiman, J. (1974). Targets and syntactic change. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodge, C. (1970). The linguistic cycle. LSci 13. 1–7.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. (1975). French syntax. The transformational cycle. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Klein, W. (1975). Eine Theorie der Wortstellungsveränderungen. Einige kritische Bemerkungen zu Vennemanns Theorie der Sprachentwicklung. LBer 37. 46–57.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, D. (1979). Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Pulgram, E. (1967). Trends and predictions. In To honor Roman Jakobson, 1634–49. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Pulgram, E. (1977). Indo-European passive paradigms: defects and repairs. Forum linguisticum 2 (2). 95–106.Google Scholar
Seelbach, D. (1978). Transformationsregeln im Französischen aus der Sicht der historischen und romanischen Syntax. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Steever, S., Walker, C. & Mufwene, S. eds. (1976). Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax. Chicago: CLS.Google Scholar
Steinmeyer, G. (1979). Historische Aspekte des français avancé. Geneva: Droz.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. (1974). Topics, subjects, and word order: from SXV to SVX via TVX. In Anderson, J. & Jones, C. (eds.) Historical linguistics. Amsterdam: North-Holland. 339–376.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. (1975). An explanation of drift. In Li, C. (ed), Word order and word order change. Austin: University of Texas Press. 269–305.Google Scholar
Weinrich, H. (1964). Tempus. Besprochene und erzählte Welt. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar