Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-klmjj Total loading time: 0.397 Render date: 2021-09-20T06:26:08.002Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Not all phi-features are created equal: A reply to Hartmann & Heycock 2018

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2018

SUSANA BÉJAR*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
ARSALAN KAHNEMUYIPOUR*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto Mississauga
*Corresponding
Author’s address: Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto, 100 Saint George Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada sbejar@chass.utoronto.ca
Author’s address: Department of Language Studies, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road, Erindale Hall 304D, Mississauga, ON, L5L 1C6, Canada a.kahnemuyipour@utoronto.ca

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Notes and Discussion
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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

Baker, Mark. 2008. The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Béjar, Susana, Denniss, Jessica, Kahnemuyipour, Arsalan & Yokoyama, Tomohiro. Forthcoming. Number matching in binominal small clauses. In Maria Arche, Antonio Fabregas & Rafael Marin (eds.), The grammar of copulas across languages (Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Béjar, Susana & Kahnemuyipour, Arsalan. 2017. Non-canonical agreement in copular clauses. Journal of Linguistics 53.3, 463499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citko, Barbara. 2002. (Anti)reconstruction effects in free relatives: A new argument against the Comp account. Linguistic Inquiry 33.3, 507511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Relators and linkers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Groos, Anneke & van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1981. Matching effects in free relatives: A parameter of core grammar. In Belletti, Adriana, Brandi, Luciana & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.), Theory of markedness in a generative grammar: Proceedings of the IV Glow Conference, 171216. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Ritter, Elizabeth. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78.3, 482526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, Jutta M. & Heycock, Caroline. 2018. A remark on Béjar & Kahnemuyipour 2017: Specificational subjects do have phi-features. Journal of Linguistics 54.3, 611627. [This issue]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heycock, Caroline. 2012. Specification, equation and agreement in copular sentences. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 57.2, 209240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romero, Maribel. 2005. Concealed questions and specificational subjects. Linguistics and Philosophy 28, 687737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Not all phi-features are created equal: A reply to Hartmann & Heycock 2018
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Not all phi-features are created equal: A reply to Hartmann & Heycock 2018
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Not all phi-features are created equal: A reply to Hartmann & Heycock 2018
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *