Abney, Steven. 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT. PhD.Google Scholar

Adger, David, and Harbour, Daniel. 2007. Syntax and syncretisms of the Person Case Constraint. Syntax 10:2–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21:435–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aissen, Judith, and Perlmutter, David. 1983. Clause reduction in Spanish. In Studies in Relational Grammar 1, ed. Perlmutter, David, 360–403. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Aldridge, Edith. 2004. Ergativity and word order in Austronesian languages. New York: Cornell University.Google Scholar

Aldridge, Edith. 2008. Generative approaches to ergativity. Language and Linguistics Compass: Syntax and Morphology 2.5:966–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aldridge, Edith. 2012. Antipassive and ergativity in Tagalog. Lingua 122:192–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexiadou, Artemis, Haegeman, Liliane, and Stavrou, Melita. 2007. Noun phrase in the generative perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Shanley. 2013. The acquisition of ergativity in Inuktitut. In The acquisition of ergative structures, ed. Bavin, E.L. and Stoll, Sabine, 71–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Amberber, Mengistu. 2002. Verb classes and transitivity in Amharic. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar

Amberber, Mengistu. 2005. Differential subject marking in Amharic. In Competition and variation in natural languages: The case for case, ed. Amberber, Mengistu and de Hoop, Helen, 295–319. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anand, Pranav, and Nevins, Andrew. 2006. The locus of ergative case assignment: Evidence from scope. In Ergativity: Emerging issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane, and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 3–25. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, Stephen. 1976. On the notion of subject in ergative languages. In Subject and topic, ed. Li, Charles, 1–23. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, Stephen. 2005. Aspects of the theory of clitics. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aoki, Haruo. 1973. Nez Perce grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Asher, R. E. 1982. Tamil. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar

Austin, Peter. 1981. A grammar of Diyari, South Australia. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Babby, Leonard. 2009. The syntax of argument structure. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1996. The polysynthesis parameter. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1997. Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In Elements of grammar, ed. Haegeman, Liliane, 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2003. Lexical categories: Verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2005. On gerunds and the theory of categories. MS. Rutgers University.

Baker, Mark. 2008. The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2010a. Formal generative typology. In The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, ed. Heine, Bernd and Narrog, Heiko. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2010b. On parameters of agreement in Austronesian languages. In Austronesian and theoretical linguistics, ed. Mercado, Raph, Potsdam, Eric, and Travis, Lisa, 345–374. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2010c. On the morphosyntactic distinctives of adjectives. Paper presented at Workshop on Adjectives and Relative Clauses: Syntax and Semantics, Venice.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2011a. Degrees of nominalizations: Clause-like constituents in Sakha. Lingua 121:1164–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2011b. When agreement is for number and gender but not person. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29:875–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2012a. “Obliqueness” as a component of argument structure in Amharic. In The end of argument structure?, ed. Cuervo, María Cristina and Roberge, Yves, 43–74. Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2012b. On the relationship of object agreement and accusative case: Evidence from Amharic. Linguistic Inquiry 43:255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2013a. Agreement and case. In The Cambridge handbook of generative syntax, ed. den Dikken, Marcel, 607–654. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2013b. On alignment type and differential object marking. Talk given at the Workshop on differential object marking, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2013c. On agreement and its relationship to case: Some generative ideas and results. Lingua 130:14–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2014a. On dependent ergative case (in Shipibo) and its derivation by phase. Linguistic Inquiry.

Baker, Mark. 2014b. Pseudo noun incorporation as covert noun incorporation: Linearization and crosslinguistic variation. Language and Linguistics 15:5–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark. In press-a. Nouns, verbs, and verbal nouns: Their structures and their structural cases. In How categorical are categories? New approaches to the old questions of noun, verb, and adjective, ed. Joanna Blaszczak and Krysztoff Migdalski. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Baker, Mark. In press-b. Types of crosslinguistic variation in case assignment. In Linguistic variation in the minimalist program, ed. Josep Brucat and Carme Picallo. New York: Oxford University Press.

Baker, Mark, and Atlamaz, Ümit. 2013. On the relationship of case to agreement in split-ergative Kurmanji. MS. N.J.: Rutgers University.

Baker, Mark, and Kramer, Ruth. 2014. Rethinking Amharic prepositions as case markers inserted at PF. Lingua 145:141–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark, Safir, Ken and Sikuku, Justine. 2012. Sources of (A)symmetry in Bantu double object constructions. In Proceedings of the 30th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. Arnett, Nathan and Bennett, Ryan, 54–64. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar

Baker, Mark, and Vinokurova, Nadezhda. 2009. On agentive nominalizations and how they differ from event nominalizations. Language 85:517–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, Mark, and Vinokurova, Nadezhda. 2010. Two modalities of case assignment in Sakha. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28:593–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, Chris. 2012. Quantificational binding does not require c-command. Linguistic Inquiry 43:614–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, Chris, and Dowty, David. 1993. Nonverbal thematic proto-roles. MS. Ohio State University.Google Scholar

Barss, Andrew, and Lasnik, Howard. 1986. A note on anaphora and double objects. Linguistic Inquiry 17:347–354.Google Scholar

Béjar, Susana, and Rezac, Milan. 2009. Cyclic agree. Linguistic Inquiry 40:35–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Belletti, Adriana, and Rizzi, Luigi. 1988. Psych-verbs and θ-theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6:291–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Benmamoun, Elabbas. 2000. The feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bhatt, Rajesh. 2005. Long distance agreement in Hindi-Urdu. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23:757–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bittner, Maria. 1994. Case, scope, and binding. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bittner, Maria, and Hale, Kenneth. 1996a. Ergativity: Toward a theory of a heterogeneous class. Linguistic Inquiry 27:531–604.Google Scholar

Bittner, Maria, and Hale, Kenneth. 1996b. The structural determination of case and agreement. Linguistic Inquiry 27:1–68.Google Scholar

Blake, Barry. 1994. Case. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarPubMed

Blake, Barry. 2001. Case. 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Boas, Franz. 1911. Tsimshian. In Handbook of American Indian languages, ed. Boas, Franz, 287–422. Washington: American Bureau of Ethnology.Google Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan. 1993. Nominally absolutive is not absolutely nominative. In Proceedings of the Eleventh West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. Mead, Jonathan, 44–60. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2002. A-chains at the PF-interface: Copies and “covert” movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20:197–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2008. Where's Phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. In Phi theory: Phi features across interfaces and modules, ed. Adger, David, Harbour, Daniel, and Béjar, Susanna, 295–328. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan, and Branigan, Phil. 2006. Eccentric agreement and multiple case checking. In Ergativity: Emerging issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane, and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 47–77. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan, and Yatsushiro, Kazuko. 2006. Problems with honorification-as-agreement in Japanese: A reply to Boeckx and Niinuma. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24:355–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bok-Bennema, Reineke. 1991. Case and agreement in Inuit. Berlin: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Borer, Hagit. 2005. The normal course of events. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bošković, Zeljko. 2008. What will you have, DP or NP? In Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society 37, 101–114. Amherst, Mass.: University of Massachusetts GLSA.Google Scholar

Bowerman, Melissa. 1985. What shapes children's grammars? In The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, ed. Slobin, Dan, 1257–1320. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan, and Kanerva, Joni. 1989. Locative inversion in Chichewa: A case study of factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20:1–50.Google Scholar

Broadwell, George Aaron. 2006. A Choctaw reference grammar. Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar

Brown, Lea. 1997. Nominal mutation in Nias. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. Odé, Cecilia and Stokhof, Wim, 395–413. Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi.Google Scholar

Brown, Lea. 2001. A grammar of Nias Selatan. University of Sydney: Ph. D. dissertation.Google Scholar

Brown, Lea. 2003. Nias: An exception to universals of argument marking. Paper presented at Association of Linguistic Typology 5 (ALT 5), Sardinia.Google Scholar

Brown, Lea. 2005. Nias. In The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, ed. Adelaar, Alexander and Himmelmann, Nikolaus, 562–589. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bruening, Benjamin. 2004. Verbal reciprocals. In Demoting the agent: Proceedings of the Oslo workshop on passive and other voice-related phenomena, ed. Stolstad, T., Lyngfelt, B., and Krave, M., 3–12. University of Oslo.Google Scholar

Burzio, Luigi. 1986. Italian syntax: A government-binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butt, Miriam. 2006. Theories of case. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butt, Miriam, and King, Tracy Holloway. 2003. Case systems: Beyond structural distinctions. In New perspectives on case theory, ed. Brandner, Ellen and Zinmeister, Heike, 53–87. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar

Caha, Pavel. 2009. The nanosyntax of case. University of Tromsoe: Ph.D. dissertation.

Camacho, José. 2010. On case concord: The syntax of switch-reference clauses. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28:239–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cardinaletti, Anna. 2004. Toward a cartography of subject positions. In The structure of CP and IP, ed. Rizzi, Luigi, 115–165. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6:339–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cho, Young-Me, and Sells, Peter. 1995. A lexical account of inflectional suffixes in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 4:119–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by Step, ed. Martin, Roger, Michaels, David and Uriagereka, Juan, 89–155. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Kenstowicz, Michael, 1–52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam, and Lasnik, Howard. 1993. The theory of principles and parameters. In Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. Jacobs, Joachim, von Stechow, Arnim, Sternefeld, Wolfgang and Vennemann, Theo, 506–569. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra. 1978. Case marking and grammatical relations in Polynesian. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra. 1998. The design of agreement. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Types of A-bar dependencies. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Cole, Peter. 1985. Imbabura Quechua. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1978. Ergativity. In Syntactic typology, ed. Lehmann, Winfred, 329–394. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1981a. Language universals and linguistic typology. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1981b. The languages of the Soviet Union: Cambridge language surveys. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 2005. Alignment of case marking of full noun phrases. In The world atlas of language structures, ed. Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard, 398–403. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Coon, Jessica. 2010. Complementation in Chol (Mayan): A theory of split ergativity. MIT: Ph. D. dissertation.Google Scholar

Coon, Jessica, and Preminger, Omer. 2012. Taking “ergativity” out of split ergativity: A structural account of aspect and person splits. MS. Montreal: McGill University and Syracuse University.

Croft, William. 1990. Typology and universals. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Crysmann, Berthold. 2009. Deriving superficial ergativity in Nias. In Proceedings of the HPSG09 Conference, ed. Müller, Stefan. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar

Czepluch, H. 1982. Case theory and the dative construction. The Linguistic Review 2:1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davies, William. 1986. Choctaw verb agreement and universal grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Hoop, Helen. 2009. Case in optimality theory. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 88–101.

de Hoop, Helen, and Zwarts, Joost. 2009. Case in formal semantics. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 170–181.

Deal, Amy Rose. 2010. Ergative case and the transitive subject: A view from Nez Perce. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28:73–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Deal, Amy Rose. In press. Ergativity. In The international handbook on syntactic contemporary research, ed. Artemis Alexiadou and T. Kiss. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Diercks, Michael. 2012. Parameterizing case: Evidence from Bantu. Syntax 15.

Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dikken, Marcel den. 1995. Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 1979. Ergativity. Language 55:59–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 1972. The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 1982. Where have all the adjectives gone?Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donohue, Mark. 1999. A grammar of Tukang Besi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donohue, Mark, and Brown, Lea. 1999. Ergativity: Some additions from Indonesia. Australian Journal of Linguistics 19:57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dryer, Matthew. 1982. Passive and inversion in Kannada. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1982), 311–334. Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar

Dunn, John Asher. 1979. Tsimshian connectives. International Journal of American Linguistics 45:131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dunn, John Asher. 1995. Sm'algyax: A reference dictionary and grammar for Coast Tsimshian. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar

Dunn, Michael. 1999. A grammar of Chukchi. Australian National University: Ph.D. dissertation.

Eissenbeiss, Sonja, Narasimhan, Bhuvana, and Voeikova, Maria. 2009. The acquisition of case. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 369–383.

Emonds, Joseph. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Emonds, Joseph. 1985. A unified theory of syntactic categories. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Epstein, Samuel, Groat, Erich, Kawashima, Ruriko, and Kitahara, Hisatsugu. 1998. A derivational approach to syntactic relations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 1995. A grammar of Kayardild. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fell, Brian. 2012. Case and agreement in Ubykh. MS.

Finer, Daniel. 1984. The formal grammar of switch-reference. University of Massachusetts-Amherst: Ph.D. dissertation.

Fortescue, Michael. 1984. West Greenlandic. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Fox, Danny, and Pesetsky, David. 2004. Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics 31:1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frank, Paul. 1990. Ika syntax. Arlington, Texas: SIL and University of Texas-Arlington.Google Scholar

Franklin, Karl. 1971. A grammar of Kewa, New Guinea. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Franks, Steven. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

George, Leland, and Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1981. Finiteness and boundedness in Turkish. In Binding and filtering, ed. Heny, Frank, 105–129. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gerdts, Donna, and Youn, Cheong. 1999. Case stacking and focus in Korean. In Harvard studies in Korean linguistics VI: Proceedings of the 1999 Harvard International Symposium on Korean Linguistics, ed. Kuno, Susumu. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.Google Scholar

Gibson, Jeanne. 1980. Clause union in Chamorro and in Universal Grammar. UCSD: Ph.D. dissertation.

Gordon, Lynn. 1986. Maricopa morphology and syntax. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Grimshaw, Jane. 1991. Extended projection. MS. Brandeis University.

Guilfoyle, Eithne, Hung, Henrietta, and Travis, Lisa. 1992. Spec of IP and Spec of VP: Two subjects in Austronesian languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10:375–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gulya, János. 1966. Eastern Ostyak cherstomathy. Bloomington, Ind.: University of Indiana Press.Google Scholar

Gündoğdu, Songul. 2011. The phrase structure of two dialects of Kurmanji Kurdish: Standard dialect and Mus dialect. MS. Bogazici University.Google Scholar

Hale, Kenneth. 1983. Warlpiri and the grammar of nonconfigurational languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1:5–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hale, Kenneth, and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In The view from building 20, ed. Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 53–110. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Halle, Morris, and Marantz, Alec. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The view from building 20, ed. Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 111–176. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Harley, Heidi. 2013. External arguments and the mirror principle: On the independence of Voice and v. Lingua 125:34–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harris, Alice. 1981. Georgian syntax: A study in relational grammar. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heck, Fabian, Müller, Gereon, and Trommer, Jochen. 2008. A phase-based approach to Scandinavian definiteness marking. In Proceedings of the 26th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. Chang, Charles and Haynie, Hannah, 226–233. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar

Heck, Fabian, and Zimmermann, Malte. 2004. DPs as phases. MS. Universität Leipzig and Humboldt Universität Berlin.

Henderson, Brent. 2014. External possession in Chimwiini. Journal of Linguistics 50:297–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hendrick, Randall. 2004. Syntactic labels and their derivations. MS. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Hiraiwa, Ken. 2005. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: Agreement and clausal architecture. MIT: Ph. D. dissertation.Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul, and Thompson, Sandra. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56:251–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hornstein, Norbert. 1999. Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry 30:69–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutchison, John. 1981. A reference grammar of the Kanuri language. Madison, Wis.: African studies program, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Jelinek, Eloise. 1988. The case split and pronominal arguments in Choctaw. In Configurationality: The typology of asymmetries, ed. Marácz, Lázló and Muysken, Pieter. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Johns, Alana. 2000. Ergativity: A perspective on recent work. In The first glot internation state-of-the-article book, ed. Cheng, Lisa L.-S. and Sybesma, Rint, 47–73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1975. French syntax: The transformational cycle. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1984. Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1989. Facets of Romance past participle agreement. In Dialect variation and the theory of grammar, ed. Benincà, Paula, 85–105. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kibrik, Alexandr. 1996. Transitivity in lexicon and grammar. In Godoberi, ed. Kibrik, Alexandr, 107–146. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar

Kim, Jong-Bok, and Sells, Peter. 2010. On the role of the eventuality in case assignment on adjuncts. Language and Linguistics 11:625–652.Google Scholar

Kim, Soowon, and Maling, Joan. 1993. Syntactic case and frequency adverbials in Korean. Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics 5:368–378.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. Explanation in phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 1987. Morphology and grammatical relations. MS. Stanford University.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 1998. Partitive case and aspect. In The projection of arguments, ed. Greuder, William and Butt, Miriam, 265–307. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 2001. Structural case in Finnish. Lingua 111:315–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiss, Katalin. 2002. The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kittilä, Seppo. 2009. Case and the typology of transitivity. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 356–365.

Kittilä, Seppo, and Malchukov, Andrej. 2009. Varieties of accusative. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds. 549–561.

Koak, Heeshin. 2012. Structural case assignment in Korean. Rutgers University: Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar

König, Christa. 2008. Case in Africa. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

König, Christa. 2009. Marked nominatives. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 535–548.

Koopman, Hilda. 1993. The structure of Dutch PPs. MS. Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar

Kramer, Ruth. In press. Clitic doubling or object agreement: The view from Amharic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.

Krueger, John. 1962. Yakut manual. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Publications.Google Scholar

Kruspe, Nicole. 2004. A grammar of Semelai. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kuroda, S.-Y. 1972. The categorical and the thetic judgment. Foundations of Language 9:153–185.Google Scholar

Kuroda, S.-Y. 1988. Whether we agree or not. Paper presented at Papers from the 2nd International Workshop on Japanese Syntax, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Laka, Itziar. 2006a. Deriving split ergativity in the progressive: The case of Basque. In Ergativity: Emerging issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane, and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 173–196. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laka, Itziar. 2006b. On the nature of case in Basque: Structural or inherent? In Organizing grammar, ed. Broekhuis, Hans, Corver, Norbert, Huybreghts, Rine, and Koster, Jan, 374–382. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2007. EPP extensions. Linguistic Inquiry 38:485–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2010. The explicit syntax of implicit arguments. Linguistic Inquiry 41:357–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lander, Yury. 2009. Varieties of genitive. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 581–592.

Larson, Richard. 1985. Bare NP adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry 16:595–622.Google Scholar

Larson, Richard. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19:335–392.Google Scholar

Lebeaux, David. 1988. Language acquisition and the form of the grammar. University of Massachusetts–Amherst: Ph.D. dissertation.

Lefebvre, Claire, and Muysken, Pieter. 1988. Mixed categories: Nominalizations in Quechua. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Legate, Julie. 2003. Some interface properties of the phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34:506–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Legate, Julie. 2006. Split absolutive. In Ergativity: Emerging issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane, and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 143–171. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Legate, Julie. 2008. Morphological and abstract case. Linguistic Inquiry 39:55–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Legate, Julie. 2012. Types of ergativity. Lingua 122:181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann, T. 1993. A grammar of modern Tamil. Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture.Google Scholar

Leslau, Wolf. 1995. Reference grammar of Amharic. Wiesbaden: Harrossowitz.Google Scholar

Levin, Beth. 1983. On the nature of ergativity, MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Levin, Theodore. 2013. Korean nominative case-stacking: A configurational account. MS. MIT.Google Scholar

Levin, Theodore, and Preminger, Omer. In press. Case in Sakha: Are two modalities really necessary? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.

Loriot, James, Lauriault, Erwin, and Day, Dwight. 1993. Diccionario Shipibo–Castellano. Lima: Instituto Linguistico de Verano.Google Scholar

Mahajan, Anoop. 1990. The A/A' distinction and movement theory. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Mahajan, Anoop. 2012. Ergatives, antipassives and the overt light v in Hindi. Lingua 122:204–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malchukov, Andrej, and de Swart, Peter. 2009. Differential case marking and actancy variations. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 339–355.

Malchukov, Andrej, and Spencer, Andrew, eds. 2009. The Oxford handbook of case. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Maling, Joan. 1989. Adverbials and structural case in Korean. Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics 3:297–308.Google Scholar

Maling, Joan. 1993. Of nominative and accusative: The hierarchical assignment of grammatical case in Finnish. In Case and other functional categories in Finnish syntax, ed. Holmberg, Anders and Nikanne, U., 51–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Maling, Joan. 2009. The case tier: A hierarchical approach to morphological case. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 72–87.

Maling, Joan, Jun, Jong Sup, and Kim, Soowon. 2001. Case-marking on duration adverbs revisited. In Selected Papers from the 12th International Conference on Korean Linguistics, ed. Ahn, Hee-Don and Kim, Namkil, 323–335. Seoul: Kyungjin Munhwasa.Google Scholar

Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Marantz, Alec. 1991. Case and licensing. Paper presented at The 8th Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, University of Maryland.Google Scholar

Mascaró, Juan. 1976. Catalan phonology and the phonological cycle. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Massam, Diane. 2001. Pseudo noun incorporation in Niuean. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19:153–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Massam, Diane. 2006. Neither absolutive nor ergative is nominative or accusative. In Ergativity: Emerging issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane, and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 27–46. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCloskey, James. 1996. On the scope of verb movement in Irish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14:47–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McFadden, Thomas. 2004. The position of morphological case in the derivation. University of Pennsylvania: Ph.D. dissertation.

McFadden, Thomas, and Sundaresan, Sandhya. 2009. DP distribution and finiteness in Tamil and other languages: Selection vs. case. Journal of South Asian Linguistics 2:5–34.Google Scholar

McGinnis, Martha. 1998. Locality in A-movement. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Merchant, Jason. 2008. Polyvalent case, geometric hierarchies, and split ergativity. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, ed. Bunting, Jackie and Desai, Sapna, 47–67. Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar

Merlan, Francesca. 1982. Mangarayi. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar

Merlan, Francesca. 1994. A grammar of Wardaman. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moore, John. 1998. Turkish copy-raising and A-chain locality. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16:149–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moro, Andrea. 2000. Dynamic antisymmetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Mulder, Jean Gail. 1994. Ergativity in Coast Tsimshian. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Munro, Pamela. 1976. Mojave syntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Munro, Pamela, and Gordon, Lynn. 1982. Syntactic relations in Western Muskogean. Language 58:81–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nash, Lea. 1996. The internal ergative subject hypothesis. Paper presented at Proceedings of NELS 26, Harvard University and MIT.Google Scholar

Nedjalkov, V. P. 1976. Diathesen und Satzstruktur im Tschuktschischen. In Satzstruktur und genus verbi, ed. Lötsch, Ronald and Ruzicka, Rudolf, 181–211. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar

Nedjalkov, V. P. 1979. Degrees of ergativity in Chukchee. In Ergativity: Towards a theory of grammatical relations, ed. Plank, Frans, 241–262. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62:56–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 2011. Ingush Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Ochs, Elinor. 1985. Variation and error: A sociolinguistic approach to language acquisition in Samoan. In The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, ed. Slobin, Dan, 783–838. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Olli, John. 1958. Fundamentals of Finnish grammar. New York: Northland Press.Google Scholar

Owens, Jonathan. 1985. A grammar of Harar Oromo (Northeastern Ethiopia). Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar

Öztürk, Balkiz. 2005. Case, referentiality and phrase structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Palancar, Enrique. 2009. Varieties of ergative. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 562–571.

Parsons, Terence. 1990. Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Pereltsvaig, Asya. 1999. Cognate objects in Russian: Is the notion “cognate” relevant to syntax?Canadian Journal of Linguistics 44:267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Perlmutter, David. 1970. The two verbs begin. In Readings in English transformational grammar, ed. Jacobs, R. and Rosenbaum, Peter. Waltam, Mass.: Blaisdell.Google Scholar

Pesetsky, David, and Torrego, Esther. 2004. Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In The syntax of time, ed. Gueron, Jacqueline and Lecarme, Jacqueline, 495–538. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Peterson, Tyler. 2006. Issues of morphological ergativity in the Tsimshian languages. In Case, valency, and transitivity, ed. Kulikov, Leonid, Malchukov, Andrej, and de Swart, Peter, 65–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Polinsky, Maria. 2003. Non-canonical agreement is canonical. Transactions of the Philological Society 101:279–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Polinsky, Maria. In press. A tale of two ergatives. New York: Oxford University Press.

Polinsky, Maria, and Potsdam, Eric. 2001. Long distance agreement and topic in Tsez. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19:583–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Polinsky, Maria, and Potsdam, Eric. 2002. Backward control. Linguistic Inquiry 33:245–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollard, Carl, and Sag, Ivan. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Postal, Paul. 1971. Cross-over phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar

Potsdam, Eric, and Polinsky, Maria. 2012. Backward raising. Syntax 15:75–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Preminger, Omer 2009a. Breaking agreements: Distinguishing agreement and clitic doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry 40:619–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Preminger, Omer 2009b. Failure to agree is not a failure: Phi-agreement with post-verbal subjects in Hebrew. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9:241–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Preminger, Omer 2012. The absence of an implicit object in unergatives: New and old evidence from Basque. Lingua 122:278–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Preminger, Omer In press. Agreement and its failures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Primus, Beatrice. 2009. Case, grammatical relations, and semantic roles. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 261–275.

Pye, Clifton. 1990. The acquisition of ergative languages. Linguistics 28–6:1291–1330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reinhart, Tanya, and Reuland, Eric. 1991. Anaphors and logophors: An argument structure perspective. In Long-distance anaphora, ed. Koster, Jan and Reuland, Eric. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rezac, Milan. 2003. The fine structure of cyclic Agree. Syntax 6:156–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rezac, Milan. 2011. Phi-features and the modular architecture of language. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rezac, Milan, Albizu, Pablo, and Etxepare, Ricardo. In press. The structural ergative of Basque and the theory of case. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.

Richards, Norvin. 2001. Featural cyclicity and the ordering of multiple specifiers. In Working Minimalism, ed. Epstein, Samuel and Hornstein, Norbert, 127–158. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Richards, Norvin. 2010. Uttering trees. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 1990a. On the anaphor-agreement effect. Rivista di Linguistica 2:27–42.Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 1990b. Relativized minimality. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, ed. Haegeman, Liliane, 281–338. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ross, John. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar

Rude, Noel. 1986. Topicality, transitivity, and the direct object in Nez Perce. International Journal of American Linguistics 52:124–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rude, Noel. 1988. Ergative, passive, and antipassive in Nez Perce. In Passive and voice, ed. Shibatani, M., 547–560. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Saito, Mamoru. 1985. Some asymmetries in Japanese and their theoretical implications. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Saito, Mamoru. 1992. Long distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1:69–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Saito, Mamoru, Lin, T.-H., and Murasugi, Keiko. 2008. N'-ellipsis and the structure of noun phrases in Chinese and Japanese. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 28:297–321.Google Scholar

Sarma, Vaijayanthi. 2009. Case, agreement and word order: Issues in the syntax and acquisition of Tamil. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Schieffelin, Bambi. 1985. The acquisition of Kaluli. In The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, ed. Slobin, Dan, 525–593. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Schütze, Carson. 1997. Infl in child and adult language: Agreement, case and licensing. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Schütze, Carson. 2001. On Korean “case stacking”: The varied functions of the particles -ka and -lul. The Linguistic Review 18:193–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selvanathan, Nagarajan. 2013. Specificational copula in Tamil. MS. N.J.: Rutgers University.Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna. 2005a. Alignment of verbal person marking. In The world atlas of language structures, ed. Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David, and Comrie, Bernard, 406–409. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna. 2005b. Verbal person marking. In The world atlas of language structures, ed. Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David, and Comrie, Bernard, 414–417. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna, and Bakker, Dik. 2009. Case and alternative strategies. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 290–303.

Sigurðsson, Halldór. 2008. The case of PRO. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26:403–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Grammatical categories in Australian languages, ed. Dixon, R.M.W., 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar

Simpson, Jane. 1991. Warlpiri morpho-syntax: A lexicalist approach. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smeets, Ineke. 1989. A Mapuche grammar. University of Leiden: Ph.D. dissertation.

Sridhar, S. N. 1979. Dative subjects and the notion of subject. Lingua 49:99–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stachowski, Marek, and Menz, Astrid. 1998. Yakut. In The Turkic languages, ed. Johanson, Lars and Csató, Eva, 417–433. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Sterling, Lesley. 1993. Switch-reference and discourse representation. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stowell, Timothy. 1981. Origins of phrase structure. MIT: Ph.D. dissertation.

Stowell, Timothy. 1983. Subjects across categories. The Linguistic Review 2:285–312.Google Scholar

Sulkala, Helena, and Karjalainen, Helena. 1992. Finnish. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Svenonius, Peter. 2004. On the edge. In Peripheries: Syntactic edges and their effects, ed. Adger, David, de Cat, Cécile, and Tsoulas, George, 258–287. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Terzi, Arhonto. 1992. PRO in finite clauses: A study of the inflectional heads of the Balkan languages. CUNY: Ph.D. dissertation.

Torres Bustamante, Teresa. 2011. Symmetrical objecthood in Panoan languages. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17:225–234.Google Scholar

Ura, Hiroyuki. 2000. Checking theory and grammatical functions in Universal Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ura, Hiroyuki. 2001. Case. In The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, ed. Baltin, Mark and Collins, Chris, 334–373. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ura, Hiroyuki. 2006. A parametric syntax of aspectually conditioned split-ergativity. In Ergativity: emerging issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane, and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 111–141. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vainikka, Anne. 1993. The three structural cases in Finnish. In Case and other functional categories in Finnish syntax, ed. Holmberg, Anders and Nikanne, Urpo, 129–159. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Valenzuela, Pilar. 2003. Transitivity in Shipibo-Konibo grammar. University of Oregon: Ph.D. dissertation.

van Hout, Angeliek. 1996. Event semantics of verb frame alternations. University of Tilburg: Ph.D. dissertation.

Van Valin, Robert. 1991. Another look at Icelandic case marking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9:145–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Valin, Robert. 1992. Ergative phenomena and language acquisition. In The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, ed. Slobin, Dan, 15–38. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Van Valin, Robert. 2009. Case in role and reference grammar. In Malchukov and Spencer, eds., 102–120.

Vergnaud, Jean-Roger. 2008. Letter to Noam Chomsky and Howard Lasnik on “Filters and Control.” In Foundational issues in linguistic theory, ed. Freidin, Robert, Otero, Carlos, and Zubizarreta, Maria-Luisa, 3–15. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Vinokurova, Nadezhda. 2005. Lexical categories and argument structure: A study with reference to Sakha. University of Utrecht: Ph.D. dissertation.

Webelhuth, Gert. 1992. Principles and parameters of syntactic saturation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Wechsler, Stephen, and Lee, Yae-Sheik. 1996. The domain of direct case assignment. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14:629–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Willson, Stephen. 1996. Verb agreement and case marking in Burushaski. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics North Dakota 40:1–71.Google Scholar

Woolford, Ellen. 1997. Four-way case systems: Ergative, nominative, objective, and accusative. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15:181–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Woolford, Ellen. 1999. More on the anaphor agreement effect. Linguistic Inquiry 30:257–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Woolford, Ellen. 2006. Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry 37:111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wunderlich, D. 1997. Case and the structure of verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 28:27–68.Google Scholar

Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2003. Infinitives: Restructuring and clause structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yip, Moira, Maling, Joan, and Jackendoff, Ray. 1987. Case in tiers. Language 63:217–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zaenen, Annie, Maling, Joan, and Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1985. Case and grammatical functions: The Icelandic passive. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3:441–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar