Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-23T21:31:26.705Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Raising: one rule of English grammar and its theoretical implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

J. R. Hurford
J. R. Hurford
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics and Modern English Language, University of Lancaster.
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
Review Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 1979 , pp. 111 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Bach, E. (1977). Review article on Postal, P. M. (1974) On Raising (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press). Lg 53. 621–654.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. (1970). On complementizers: towards a syntactic theory of complement types. FL 6. 297–321.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. (1976). Nonarguments for Raising. LIn 7. 485–501.Google Scholar
Botha, R. P. (1976). ‘The theory comparison method’ vs, ‘the theory exposition method’ in linguistic inquiry. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalizations. In Jacobs, R. A. & Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds), Readings in English transformational grammar. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn & Co.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations. In Anderson, S. R. & Kiparsky, P. (eds), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1975). The logical structure of linguistic theory. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1976). Reflections on language. Glasgow: Fontana.Google Scholar
Dougherty, R. C. (1973). A survey of linguistic methods and arguments. FL 10. 423–490.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1970). Three reasons for not deriving ‘kill’ from ‘cause to die’. LIn. 1 429–438.Google Scholar
Hurford, J. R. (1973). Deriving S from S +is. In Kimball, J. (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 2. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Klima, E. S. (1964). Negation in English. In Fodor, J. A. & Katz, J. J. (eds) The structure of language. Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1970a). Irregularity in syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1970b). Global rules. Lg 46. 627–639.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (1969). Mirror image rules I: syntax. Lg 45. 575–598.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, D. (1976). The theoretical implications of subject raising. FL 14. 257–285.Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. (1972). The best theory. in Peters, S. (ed.), Goals of linguistic theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Postal, P. M. (1977). About a ‘nonargument’ for Raising. LIn 8. 141–154.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. S. (1967). The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. (1969). Adjectives as noun phrases. In Reibel, D. & Schane, S. (eds), Modern studies in English. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. (1970). On declarative sentences. In Jacobs, R. A. & Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds), Readings in English transformational grammar. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn & Co.Google Scholar