Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T23:41:51.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes for Contributors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2009

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
Notes for Contributors
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , September 1994 , pp. 591 - 598
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

SAMPLE REFERENCEES

Baker, M. (1985). Incorporation: a theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berwick, R. C. (1991). Principle-based parsing. In Sells et al. (eds.). 115–226.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1965). The atomization of meaning. Language 41. 555–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bortolini, U., Tagliavini, C. & Zampoli, A. (1971). Lessico di frequenza della lingua italiana contemporanea. Milan: Garzanti.Google Scholar
Brugmann, K. (1906). Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. (2nd ed., vol. 2, part I.) Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957) Syntactic stuctures. (Janua Linguarum 4.) The Hague: Morton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W. A. (1992). Review of Battistella, E. L. Markedness: the evaluative superstructure of language. Journal of Linguistics 28. 228–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankamer, J. (1971). Constraints on deletion in syntax. Ph D. dissertation, Yale University. (Abridged version published in 1979, New York: Garland.)Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1964) The Proto Central Algonquian kinship system. In Goodenough, W. (ed.) Explorations in cultural anthropology. New York: McGraw-Hill. 239–258.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1968) Concerning the base component of a transformational grammar. Foundations of Language 4. 243–269. (Reprinted in McCawley, J. D. (1976). Grammar and meaning. New York: Academic Press. 35–58.)Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1987). Some additional evidence for discontinuity. In Huck, G. J. & Ojeda, A. E. (eds.) Syntax and semantics 20: Discontinuous constituency. New York: Academic Press. 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagarajan, S. (1990). Tamil serial verbs. Ms., University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. (1978). Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 4. 157–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pullum, G. K. (1985). Assuming some version of X-bar theory. Proceedings of the 21st Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. (Part I.) Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 323–353.Google Scholar
Rounds, W. C. (1991). The relevance of computational complexity theory to natural language processing. In Sells et al. (eds.). 9–29.Google Scholar
Sells, P., Shieber, S. M. & Wasow, T. (eds.) (1991). Foundational issues in natural language processing. (System Development Foundation Benchmark Series.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar