1887

Lexicalising Clausal Syntax

The interaction of syntax, the lexicon and information structure in Hungarian

image of Lexicalising Clausal Syntax

The book presents a new perspective on clausal syntax and its interactions with lexical and discourse function information by analysing Hungarian sentences. It also demonstrates ways in which grammar engineering implementations can provide insights into how complex linguistic processes interact. It analyses the most important phenomena in the preverbal domain of Hungarian finite declarative and wh-clauses: sentence structure, operators, verbal modifiers, negation and copula constructions. Based on the results of earlier generative linguistic research, it presents the fundamental empirical generalisations and offers a comparative critical assessment of the most salient analyses in a variety of generative linguistic models from its own perspective. It argues for a lexical approach to the relevant phenomena and develops the first comprehensive analysis in the theoretical framework of Lexical-Functional Grammar. It also reports the successful implementation of crucial aspects of this analysis in the computational linguistic platform of the theory, Xerox Linguistic Environment.

References

  1. Ackerman, Farrell
    1987 Miscreant morphemes: Phrasal predicates in Ugric. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 1990 The morphological blocking principle and oblique pronominal incorporation in Hungarian. In Katarzyna Dziwirek , Patrick M. Farrell & Errapel Meijas-Bikandi (eds.), Grammatical relations: A cross-theoretical perspective, 1–19. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2003 Lexeme derivation and multiword predicates in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica50. 7–32. 10.1556/ALing.50.2003.1‑2.2
    https://doi.org/10.1556/ALing.50.2003.1-2.2 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ackerman, Farrell & Gert Webelhuth
    1993 The composition of (dis)continuous predicates: Lexical or syntactic?Acta Linguistica Hungarica44. 317–340.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ackerman, Farrell & Philip Lesourd
    1997 Toward a lexical representation of phrasal predicates. In Alsina 1997 67–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ackerman, Farrell & Gert Webelhuth
    1998A theory of predicates. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ackerman, Farrell , Gregory T. Stump & Gert Webelhuth
    2011 Lexicalism, periphrasis, and implicative morphology. In Robert D. Borsley & Kersti Börjars (eds.), Non-transformational syntax: Formal and explicit models of grammar, 325–358. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444395037.ch9
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444395037.ch9 [Google Scholar]
  8. Alberti, Gábor
    1999a Generative argument structure grammar: A strictly compositional syntax for DRS-type representations. Acta Linguistica Hungarica46. 3–68. 10.1023/A:1009621924533
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009621924533 [Google Scholar]
  9. 1999b GASG: The grammar of total lexicalism. Working papers in the theory of grammar6, 1–50. Budapest: Theoretical Linguistics Programme, ELTE and Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 2000 A totális lexikalizmus grammatikája [The grammar of total lexicalism]. In István Kenesei (ed.), Igei vonzatszerkezet a magyarban [Verbal argument structure in hungarian], 333–385. Budapest: Osiris.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2011 ReALIS, avagy a szintaxis dekompozíciója [ReALIS alias the decomposition of syntax]. Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok23. 51–98.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Alberti, Gábor & Judit Kleiber
    2010 The grammar of ReALIS and the implementation of its dynamic interpretation. Informatica Ljubljana34. 103–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Alberti, Gábor , Judit Gervain , Zsuzsanna Schnell , Veronika Szabó & Bálint Tóth
    2015 A vonzatsorrend és az esetmorfológia külső meghatározottsága [The externally determined nature of the order of arguments and case morphology]. In Edit Kádár & Sándor, Szilágyi N. (eds.), Motiváltság és nyelvi ikonicitás [Motivation and linguistic iconicity], 155–186. Cluj-Napoca, Romania: Erdélyi Múzeum-Egyesület.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Alsina, Alex
    1992 On the argument structure of causatives. Linguistic Inquiry23. 517–555.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 1996 Resultatives: A joint operation of semantic and syntactic structures. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG96 Conference, paper 2. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 1997 A theory of complex predicates: Evidence from causatives in Bantu and Romance. Alsina 1997 203–246.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Alsina, Alex , Joan Bresnan & Peter Sells
    eds. 1997Complex predicates. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Attia, Mohammed
    2008 A unified analysis of copula constructions. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG08 Conference, 89–108. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Austin, Peter & Joan Bresnan
    1996 Nonconfigurationality in Australian aboriginal languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory14. 215–268. 10.1007/BF00133684
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133684 [Google Scholar]
  20. Baker, Mark C.
    1988Incorporation. A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Bartos, Huba
    1999 Morfoszintaxis és interpretáció: A magyar inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere [Morphosyntax and interpretation: The syntactic background of Hungarian inflectional phenomena]. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Behaghel, Otto
    1932Deutsche Syntax IV. Heidelberg: Carl Winters.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Bobaljik, Jonathan David & Susi Wurmbrand
    2012 Word order and scope: Transparent interfaces and the ¾ signature. Linguistic Inquiry43. 371–421. 10.1162/LING_a_00094
    https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00094 [Google Scholar]
  24. Booij, Gert & Jaap van Marle
    eds. 2003Yearbook of morphology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Borsley, Robert D.
    1996Modern phrase structure grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Bowers, John
    1993 The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry24. 591–656.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Bögel, Tina
    2015 The syntax-prosody interface in lexical functional grammar. Konstanz: University of Konstanz dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Bögel, Tina , Miriam Butt , Ronald M. Kaplan , Tracy Holloway King & John T. Maxwell III
    2009 Prosodic phonology in LFG: A new proposal. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG09 Conference, 146–166. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 2010 Second position and the prosody-syntax interface. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG10 Conference, 106–126. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Börjars, Kersti , John Payne & Erika Chisarik
    1999 On the justification for functional categories in LFG. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG99 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Börjars, Kersti , Rachel Nordlinger & Louisa Sadler
    2019Lexical-functional grammar: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316756584
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316756584 [Google Scholar]
  32. Bresnan, Joan
    ed. 1982aThe mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 1982b The passive in lexical theory. Bresnan 1982a 3–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 2000 Optimal syntax. In Dekkers 2000 334–385.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 2001Lexical-functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Bresnan, Joan & Sam A. Mchombo
    1987 Topic, pronoun, and agreement in chichewa. Language63. 741–782. 10.2307/415717
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415717 [Google Scholar]
  37. Bresnan, Joan , Ash Asudeh , Ida Toivonen & Stephen Wechsler
    2016Lexical-functional syntax. Wiley: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Brody, Michael
    1990 Remarks on the order of elements in the Hungarian focus field. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 3. Structures and arguments, 95–122. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 1995 Focus and checking theory. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 5. Levels and structures, 29–43. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Brody, Michael & Anna Szabolcsi
    2003 Overt scope in Hungarian. Syntax6. 19–51. 10.1111/1467‑9612.00055
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9612.00055 [Google Scholar]
  41. Bródy, Mihály & Kriszta Szendrői
    2011 A kimerítő felsorolás értelmezésű fókusz: válasz [The focus interpreted as exhaustive listing: An answer]. In Huba Bartos (ed.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XXIII. Új irányok és eredmények a mondattani kutatásban, 265–279. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Broekhuis, Hans
    2008Derivations and evaluations: Object shift in the Germanic languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110207200
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110207200 [Google Scholar]
  43. Broekhuis, Hans & Veronika Hegedűs
    2009 Predicate movement. Lingua119. 531–563. 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.11.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.11.003 [Google Scholar]
  44. Butt, Miriam
    2003 The light verb jungle. Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics9. 1–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 1997 Complex predicates in Urdu. In Alsina 1997 107–149
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Butt, Miriam & Tracy Holloway King
    1998 Interfacing phonology with LFG. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG98 Conference, paper 9. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Butt, Miriam , Tracy Holloway King , María-Eugenia Niño & Frédérique Segond
    1999aA Grammar writer’s cookbook. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Butt, Miriam , Stefanie Dipper , Anette Frank & Tracy Holloway King
    1999b Writing large-scale parallel grammars for English, French and German. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG99 Conference, paper 5. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Butt, Miriam , Tracy Holloway King & John T. Maxwell III
    2003 Complex predication via restriction. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG03 Conference, 92–104. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Butt, Miriam & Tracy Holloway King
    2006 Restriction for morphological valency alternations: The Urdu causative. In Miriam Butt , Mary Dalrymple & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Intelligent linguistic architectures: Variations on themes by Ronald M. Kaplan, 235–258. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Csirmaz, Anikó
    2004 Particles and phonologically defective predicates. In Henk van Riemsdijk & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), Verb clusters: A study of Hungarian, German and Dutch, 225–252. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1075/la.69.14csi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.69.14csi [Google Scholar]
  52. 2006 Particles and a two component theory of aspect. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Event structure and the left periphery. Studies on Hungarian, 107–128. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4755‑8_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4755-8_6 [Google Scholar]
  53. Dalmi, Gréte
    2010 Copular sentences, predication and cyclic agree. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University habilitation dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Dalrymple, Mary
    2001Lexical functional grammar. Syntax and semantics, Volume34. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9781849500104
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9781849500104 [Google Scholar]
  55. Dalrymple, Mary , Helge Dyvik & Tracy Holloway King
    2004 Copular complements: Closed or open?In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG04 Conference, 188–198. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Dalrymple, Mary , Ronald M. Kaplan & Tracy Holloway King
    2007 The absence of traces: Evidence from weak crossover. In Annie Zaenen , Jane Simpson , Tracy Holloway King , Jane Grimshaw , Joan Maling & Chris Manning (eds.), Architectures, rules, and preferences. Variations on themes by Joan W. Bresnan, 85–102. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Dalrymple, Mary & Louise Mycock
    2011 The prosody-semantics interface. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG11 Conference, 173–193. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Dalrymple, Mary , John J. Lowe & Louise Mycock
    2019The Oxford reference guide to lexical functional grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198733300.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198733300.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Dehé, Nicole , Ray Jackendoff , Andrew McIntyre & Silke Urban
    eds. 2002Verb-particle explorations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110902341
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110902341 [Google Scholar]
  60. Dekkers, Joost , Frank van der Leeuw & Jeroen van de Weijer
    eds. 2000Optimality theory: Phonology, syntax, and acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Dikken, Marcel den
    2006Relators and linkers. the syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5873.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5873.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Doron, Edit
    1988 The semantics of predicate nominals. Linguistics26. 281–301. 10.1515/ling.1988.26.2.281
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1988.26.2.281 [Google Scholar]
  63. Enç, Mürvet
    1991 The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry22. 1–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. É. Kiss, Katalin
    1981 Structural relations in Hungarian, a “free” word order language. Linguistic Inquiry12. 185–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 1983A magyar mondatszerkezet generatív leírása [The generative description of Hungarian sentence structure]. Nyelvtudományi Értekezések116. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 1987Configurationality in Hungarian. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó & Dordrecht: Reidel. 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑3703‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3703-1 [Google Scholar]
  67. 1992 Az egyszerű mondat szerkezete [The structure of the simple sentence]. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan. [Structural Hungarian grammar 1. Syntax], 79–177. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 1994a Sentence structure and word order. In Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian, 1–90. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 1994b Genericity, predication and focus. In Zoltán Bánréti (ed.), Papers in the theory of grammar, 107–139. Budapest: Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 1995aDiscourse configurational languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 1995b Definiteness effect revisited. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 5. Levels and structures, 63–88. Szeged: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 1998a Verbal prefixes or postpositions? Postpositional aspectualisers in Hungarian. In Casper de Groot & István Kenesei (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 6. Papers from the Amsterdam Conference, 123–148. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 1998b Multiple topic, one focus?Acta Linguistica Hungarica45. 3–29. 10.1023/A:1009614223777
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009614223777 [Google Scholar]
  74. 1999 Strategies of complex predicate formation and the hungarian verbal complex. In István Kenesei (ed.), Crossing boundaries, 91–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.182.07kis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.182.07kis [Google Scholar]
  75. 2002The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511755088
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511755088 [Google Scholar]
  76. 2004 Egy igekötőelmélet vázlata [Outlines of a theory of verbal particles]. Magyar Nyelv50. 15–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 2005 First steps towards a theory of the verbal prefix. In Christopher Piñón & Péter Siptár (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 9. Papers from the Düsseldorf Conference, 57–88. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 2006 The function and syntax of the verbal particle. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Event structure and the left periphery, 17–55. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4755‑8_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4755-8_2 [Google Scholar]
  79. 2008 Tagadás vagy egyeztetés? A senki, semmi típusú névmások szórendi helye, jelentése és hangsúlyozása [Negation or concord? The word order, interpretation and prosody of SE-pronouns]. Magyar Nyelv104. 129–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 2009a Syntactic, semantic, and prosodic factors determining the position of adverbial adjuncts. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Adverbs and adverbial adjuncts at the interfaces, 21–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214802.1.21
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214802.1.21 [Google Scholar]
  81. 2009b Deriving the properties of structural focus. In Arndt Riester & Edgar Onea (eds.), The syntax–semantics interface: Working papers of Sonderforschungsbereich732, Volume3, 19–33. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 2011 A sem szinkrón és diakrón szerepéről [On the syncronic and diacronic roles of sem ]. In Edit Kádár & Sándor, Szilágyi M. (eds.), Szinkronikus nyelvleírás és diakrónia [The synchronic description of languages and diachrony], 95–109. Cluj-Napoca, Romania: Erdélyi Múzeum Egyesület.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 2014 Ways of licensing Hungarian external possessors. Acta Linguistica Hungarica61. 45–68. 10.1556/ALing.61.2014.1.2
    https://doi.org/10.1556/ALing.61.2014.1.2 [Google Scholar]
  84. 2015 Negation in Hungarian. In Matti Miestamo , Anne Tamm & Beáta Wagner-Nagy (eds.), Negation in Uralic Languages. Typological Studies in Language108, 219–238. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.108.08kis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.108.08kis [Google Scholar]
  85. Falk, Yehuda N.
    2001Lexical-functional grammar. An introduction to parallel constraint-based syntax. CSLI Lecture Notes126. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 2004 The Hebrew present-tense copula as a mixed category. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.) Proceedings of the LFG04 Conference, 188–198. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Fanselow, Gisbert
    2004 Cyclic phonology-syntax interaction: Movement to first position in German. In Shinichiro Ishihara , Michaela Schmitz & Anne Schwarz (eds.), Interdisciplinary studies on information structure: Working papers of Sonderforschungsbereich 732, Volume1, 1–42. Potsdam, Germany: Universitätsverlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Farkas, Donka & Henriette de Swarts
    2003The semantics of incorporation. From argument structure to discourse transparency. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Forst, Martin , Tracy Holloway King & Tibor Laczkó
    2010 Particle verbs in computational LFGs: Issues from English, German, and Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG10 Conference, 228–248. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Gazdik, Anna
    2012 Towards an LFG analysis of discourse functions in Hungarian. In Ferenc Kiefer & Zoltán Bánréti (eds.), Twenty years of theoretical linguistics in Budapest, 59–92. Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet & Tinta Könyvkiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Gazdik, Anna & András Komlósy
    2011 On the syntax-discourse interface in Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG11 Conference, 215–235. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Givón, Talmy
    1976 Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. In Charles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 149–189. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Gyuris, Beáta & Katalin Mády
    2013 Approaching the prosody of Hungarian wh-exclamatives. In Péter Szigetvári (ed.), VLLXX. Papers presented to László Varga on his 70th birthday, 333–349. Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz
    1993 Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20. Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Current Studies in Linguistics, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  95. 1994 Some key features of distributed morphology. Papers on Phonology and Morphology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics21, 275–288. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Hartmann, Jutta M.
    2008 Expletives in existentials. English there and German da. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Hartmann, Jutta M. & Veronika Hegedűs
    2009 Equation is predication: Evidence from Hungarian. Paper presented at the9th International Conference on the Structure of Hungarian, University of Debrecen, August 30-September 1.
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Heggie, Lorie A.
    1988 The syntax of copular structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Heine, Bernd
    1993Auxiliaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Hegedűs, Veronika
    2013 Non-verbal predicates and predicate movement in Hungarian. Tilburg University dissertation, LOT Dissertation Series 337. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Heycock, Caroline & Anthony Kroch
    1999 Pseudocleft connectedness: Implications for the LF interface level. Linguistic Inquiry30. 365–398. 10.1162/002438999554110
    https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554110 [Google Scholar]
  102. 2002 Topic, focus, and syntactic representations. In Line Mikkelsen & Christopher Potts (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL [ West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics ] 21, 101–125. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Higgins, Francis R.
    1979The pseudo-cleft construction in English. New York: Garland.
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Hinrichs, Erhard & Tsuneko Nakazawa
    1989 Flipped out: AUX in German. In Wiltshire, Caroline , Randolph Graczyk , & Bradley Music (eds.), CLS 25: Papers form the 25th Annual Regional Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society, 193–202. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 1994 Linearising finite AUX in German verbal complexes. In John A. Nerbonne , Klaus Netter & Carl Jesse Pollard (eds.), German in head-driven phrase structure grammar, 11–38. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Horvath, Julia
    1986FOCUS in the theory of grammar and the syntax of Hungarian. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris.
    [Google Scholar]
  107. 1995 Structural focus, structural case, and the notion of feature-assignment. In É. Kiss 1995a 28–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 1998 Multiple wh-phrases and the wh-scope-marker strategy in Hungarian interrogatives. Acta Linguistica Hungarica45. 31–60. 10.1023/A:1009656907847
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009656907847 [Google Scholar]
  109. 2007 Separating ‘focus movement’ from focus. In Simin Karimi , Vida Samiian & Wendy Wilkins (eds.), Phrasal and clausal architecture, 108–145. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.101.07hor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.101.07hor [Google Scholar]
  110. 2013 Focus, exhaustivity and the syntax of wh-interrogatives: The case of Hungarian. In Johan Brandtler , Valéria Molnár & Christer Platzack (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 13. Papers from the 2011 Lund Conference, 97–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/atoh.13.06hor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.13.06hor [Google Scholar]
  111. Hunyadi, László
    1996 Hungarian syntactic structure and metrical prosody. Language Sciences18. 139–152. 10.1016/0388‑0001(96)00012‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0388-0001(96)00012-5 [Google Scholar]
  112. 1999 The outlines of a metrical syntax of Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica46. 69–93. 10.1023/A:1009677808603
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009677808603 [Google Scholar]
  113. 2002Hungarian sentence prosody and universal grammar: On the prosody–syntax interface. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Jackson, Scott
    2008 The prosody–scope relation in Hungarian. In Christopher Piñón & Szilárd Szentgyörgyi (eds.), Approches to Hungarian 10. Papers from the Veszprém Conference, 83–102. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Kádár, Edit
    2006 A kopula és a nominális mondat a magyarban [The copula and nominal sentences in Hungarian]. Cluj-Napoca, Romania: Babeş-Bolyai University dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Kaplan, Ronald M. & Joan Bresnan
    1982 Lexical-functional grammar: A Formal system for grammatical representation. In Bresnan 1982a 173–281.
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Kaplan, Ronald M. & Zaenen, Annie
    1989 Long-distance dependencies, constituent structure, and functional uncertainty. In Mark R. Baltin & Anthony S. Kroch (eds.), Alternative conceptions of phrase structure, 17–42. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Kálmán, C. György , László Kálmán , Ádám Nádasdy & Gábor Prószéky
    1984 Hocus, focus, and verb types in Hungarian infinitive constructions. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Lingustík, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen24. 162–177.
    [Google Scholar]
  119. 1989 A magyar segédigék rendszere [The system of Hungarian auxiliaries]. In Zsigmond Telegdi & Ferenc Kiefer (eds.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XVII, 49–103. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Kálmán, László
    1985 Word order in neutral sentences. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian. Vol. 1. Data and Descriptions, 13–23. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  121. ed. 2001Magyar leíró nyelvtan. Mondattan 1 [Hungarian descriptive grammar. Syntax 1]. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Kálmán, László & Gábor Rádai
    1998 Word order variation in Hungarian from a constructionist perspective. In Casper de Groot & István Kenesei (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 6. Papers from the Amsterdam Conference, 141–181. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Kálmán, László & Viktor Trón
    2000 A magyar igekötő egyeztetése [Agreement relations of the hungarian verbal particle]. In László Büky & Márta Maleczki (eds.), A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei IV [New methods in the description of the Hungarian language IV], 203–211. Szeged, Hungary: SZTE.
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Kenesei, István
    1992 Functional categories in Finno-Ugric. In Kersti Börjars & Nigel Vincent (eds.), Complement structures in the languages of Europe. EUROTYP Working Paper III/3, 22–42. Strasbourg: ESF.
    [Google Scholar]
  125. 1998 Adjuncts and arguments in VP-focus in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica45. 61–88. 10.1023/A:1009604924685
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009604924685 [Google Scholar]
  126. 2000 Szavak, szófajok, toldalékok [Words, parts of speech, suffixes]. Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Morfológia [ Structural Hungarian grammar 3. Morphology ], 75–136. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  127. 2001 Criteria for auxiliaries in Hungarian. In István Kenesei (ed.), Argument structure in Hungarian, 79–111. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  128. 2008 Funkcionális kategóriák [Functional categories]. Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 4. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), A szótár szerkezete [Structural Hungarian grammar 4. The structure of the lexicon], 601–637. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  129. 2009 Quantifiers, negation, and focus on the left periphery in Hungarian. Lingua119. 564–591. 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.11.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  130. Keszler, Borbála
    1995 A mai magyar nyelv szófaji rendszere [The part-of-speech system of present day Hungarian]. In Katalin Faluvégi , Borbála Keszler & Krisztina Laczkó (eds.), Magyar leíró nyelvtani segédköny [An auxiliary book of Hungarian descriptive grammar], 43–51. Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Kiefer, Ferenc
    1995/1996 Prefix reduplication in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica43. 175–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Kiefer, Ferenc & Mária Ladányi
    2000 Az igekötők Verbal particles. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3. Morfológia [Structural Hungarian grammar 3. Morphology], 453–518. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  133. King, Tracy Holloway
    1995Configuring topic and focus in Russian. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  134. 1997 Focus domains and information structure. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG97 Conference, paper 20. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Kleiber, Judit
    2008 A totális lexikalizmus elméletétől a kísérleti implementációig [From the theory of total lexicalism to experimental implementation]. Pécs, Hungary: University of Pécs dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Komlósy, András
    1985 Predicate complementation. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 1. Data and descriptions, 53–78. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  137. 1989 Fókuszban az igék [Verbs in focus]. In Zsigmond Telegdi & Ferenc Kiefer (eds.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XVII, 171–182. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  138. 1992 Régensek és vonzatok Predicates and arguments. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan. [Structural Hungarian grammar 1. Syntax], 299–527. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  139. 1994 Complements and adjuncts. In Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian, 91–178. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004373174_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373174_003 [Google Scholar]
  140. Koopman, Hilda & Anna Szabolcsi
    2000Verbal complexes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/7090.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7090.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  141. Koster, Jan
    1994 Predicate incorporation and the word order of Dutch. In Guglielmo Cinque , Jan Koster , Jean-Yves Pollock , Luigi Rizzi & Raffaella Zanuttini (eds.), Paths towards universal grammar. Studies in honor of Richard S. Kayne, 255–276. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Kroeger, Paul
    1993Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Kundera, Milan
    1985The unbearable lightness of being (translated from Czech by Michael Henry Heim ). London: Faber & Faber.
    [Google Scholar]
  144. Kuroda, Sige-Yuki
    1972 Categorical and thetic judgments: Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of Language9. 1–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Laczkó, Tibor
    2000 On oblique arguments and adjuncts of Hungarian event nominals  a comprehensive LFG account. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG00 Conference, 182–196. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  146. 2003 On oblique arguments and adjuncts of Hungarian event nominals. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Nominals: Inside and Out, 201–234. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  147. 2012 On the (un)bearable lightness of being an LFG style copula in Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG12 Conference, 341–361. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  148. 2013 Hungarian particle verbs revisited: Representational, derivational and implementational issues from an LFG perspective. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG13 Conference, 377–397. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  149. 2014a Essentials of an LFG analysis of Hungarian finite sentences. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG14 Conference, 325–345. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  150. 2014b An LFG analysis of verbal modifiers in Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG14 Conference, 346–366. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  151. 2014c Outlines of an LFG-XLE account of negation in Hungarian sentences. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG14 Conference, 304–324. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  152. 2014d On verbs, auxiliaries and Hungarian sentence structure in LFG. Argumentum10. 421–438.
    [Google Scholar]
  153. 2015a On an LFG-XLE treatment of negation in Hungarian. Paper presented at theParGram Meeting, Warsaw, Poland, February 4.
    [Google Scholar]
  154. 2015b On a realistic LFG treatment of the periphrastic irrealis mood in Hungarian. Paper presented at the20th International Lexical-Functional Grammar Conference, Waseda University, Tokyo, July 18–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  155. 2015c On negative particles and negative polarity in Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG15 Conference, 166–186. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  156. Laczkó, Tibor & György Rákosi
    2008–2013HunGram. An XLE Implementation. Implemented grammar, University of Debrecen. Analyses available atcorpus.hungram.unideb.hu/ and https://clarino.uib.no/iness/treebanks
    [Google Scholar]
  157. 2011 On particularly predicative particles in Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG11 Conference, 299–319. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  158. 2013 Remarks on a novel LFG approach to spatial particle verb constructions in Hungarian”. In Johan Brandtler , Valéria Molnár & Christer Platzak (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 13. Papers from the 2011 Lund Conference, 149–177. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/atoh.13.08lac
    https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.13.08lac [Google Scholar]
  159. Lipták, Anikó
    2001On the syntax of wh-items in Hungarian. Utrecht, Netherlands: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  160. Lowe, John J. & Louise Mycock
    2014 Representing information structure. Paper presented at theThe Syntax and Semantics of Unbounded Dependencies workshop at the 19th International Lexical-Functional Grammar Conference, University of Michigan, July 17–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  161. Maleczki, Márta
    2001 Indefinite arguments in Hungarian. In István Kenesei (ed.), Argument structure in Hungarian, 157–199. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  162. Marácz, László
    1989 Asymmetries in Hungarian. Groningen, Netherlands: University of Groningen dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  163. Mády, Katalin
    2012 A fókusz prozódiai jelölése felolvasásban és spontán beszédben [The encoding of focus in reading out texts and in spontaneous speech]. In Mária Gósy (ed.), Beszéd, adatbázis, kutatások [Speech, database, research], 91–107. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  164. Mády, Katalin & Ádám Szalontai
    2014 Where do questions begin? – Phrase-initial boundary tones in Hungarian polar questions. In Nick Campbell , Dafydd Gibbon & Daniel Hirst (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th international conference on speech prosody: Speech Prosody7, 568–572. Dublin: Trinity College Dublin. 10.21437/SpeechProsody.2014‑101
    https://doi.org/10.21437/SpeechProsody.2014-101 [Google Scholar]
  165. M. Korchmáros, Valéria
    1997 Ige vagy segédige [Verb or auxiliary]? In László Büky (ed.), Nyíri Antal kilencvenéves [Antal Nyíri is ninety years old], 109–124. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  166. Mohanan, K. P.
    1982 Grammatical relations and clause structure in Malayalam. In Bresnan 1982a 504–589.
    [Google Scholar]
  167. Moravcsik, Edith A.
    1974 Object-verb agreement. Working Papers in Language Universals15. 25–140.
    [Google Scholar]
  168. Moro, Andrea
    1997The raising of predicates. Predicative noun phrases and the theory of clause structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511519956
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519956 [Google Scholar]
  169. Müller, Stefan
    2006 Phrasal or lexical constructions?Language82. 850–883. 10.1353/lan.2006.0213
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0213 [Google Scholar]
  170. Mycock, Louise
    2006 A new typology of wh-questions. Manchester, England: University of Manchester dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  171. 2010 Prominence in Hungarian: The prosody-syntax connection. Transactions of the Philological Society108. 265–297. 10.1111/j.1467‑968X.2010.01241.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2010.01241.x [Google Scholar]
  172. 2013 Discourse functions of question words. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG13 Conference, 419–439. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  173. Mycock, Louise & John J. Lowe
    2013 The prosodic marking of discourse functions. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG13 Conference, 440–460. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  174. 2014 S-structure features for information structure analysis. Paper presented at the19th International Lexical-Functional Grammar Conference, University of Michigan, July 17–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  175. Nordlinger, Rachel
    1998Constructive case: Evidence from Australia. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  176. Nordlinger, Rachel & Joan Bresnan
    1996 Nonconfigurational tense in Wambaya. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG96 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  177. Nordlinger, Rachel & Louisa Sadler
    2007 Verbless clauses: Revealing the structure within. In Jane Grimshaw , Tracy Holloway King , Joan Maling , Chris Manning , Jane Simpson & Annie Zaenen (eds.), Architectures, rules and preferences: A Festschrift for Joan Bresnan, 139–160. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  178. Nőthig, László & Gábor Alberti
    2014 The discourse-semantic and syntactic background behind ReALIS. In Gábor Rappai & Csilla Filó (eds.), Well-being in information society, 104–129. Pécs, Hungary: Pécsi Tudományegyetem.
    [Google Scholar]
  179. Nőthig, László , Gábor Alberti & Mónika Dóla
    2014 ReALIS1.1. In Attila Tanács , Viktor Varga & Veronika Vincze (eds.), X. Magyar Számítógépes Nyelvészeti Konferencia – MSZNY 20014 [10th Hungarian Conference on Computational Linguistics], 364–372. Szeged, Hungary: Szegedi Tudományegyetem Informatikai Tanszékcsoport.
    [Google Scholar]
  180. O’Connor, Robert
    2006 Information structure in lexical-functional grammar. Manchester, England: University of Manchester dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  181. Olsvay, Csaba
    2000 Negative quantifiers in the Hungarian sentence. Budapest, Hungary: Eötvös Loránd University M.A. thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  182. 2006 Negative universal quantifiers in Hungarian. Lingua116. 245–271. 10.1016/j.lingua.2004.08.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2004.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  183. Payne, John & Erika Chisarik
    2000 Negation and focus in Hungarian: An optimality theory account. Transactions of the Philological Society98. 185–230. 10.1111/1467‑968X.00062
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.00062 [Google Scholar]
  184. Pelyvás, Péter
    1998 A magyar segédigék és kognitív predikátumok episztemikus lehorgonyzó szerepéről [On the epistemic grounding role of Hungarian auxiliaries and cognitive predicates]. In László Büky & Márta Maleczki (eds.), A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei 3 [recent methods in the description of present day Hungarian 3], 117–132. Szeged, Hungary: JATE.
    [Google Scholar]
  185. Piñón, Christopher J.
    1993 The preverb problem in German and Hungarian. In Laura A. Buszard-Welcher , Lionel Wee & William Weigel (eds.), Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 395–408. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  186. Pollard, Carl & Ivan A. Sag
    1987Information-based syntax and semantics, Volume 1. Fundamentals. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  187. 1994Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  188. Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky
    2004Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470759400
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470759400 [Google Scholar]
  189. Przepiórkowski, Adam & Agnieszka Patejuk
    2015 Two representations of negation in LFG: Evidence from Polish. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG15 Conference, 322–336. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  190. Puskás, Genovéva
    1994 Sentential negation in Hungarian. Rivista di Linguistica6. 5–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  191. 1998 On the neg-criterion in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica45. 167–213. 10.1023/A:1009613125594
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009613125594 [Google Scholar]
  192. 2000Word order in Hungarian: The syntax of Ā-positions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.33
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.33 [Google Scholar]
  193. Rákosi, György
    2006Dative experiencer predicates in Hungarian. Utrecht, Netherlands: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  194. 2013 Negation. Paper presented at theParGram Meeting, Debrecen, Hungary, July 23.
    [Google Scholar]
  195. Rákosi, György & Tibor Laczkó
    2011 Inflecting spatial particles and shadows of the past in Hungarian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG11Conference, 440–460. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  196. Sadler, Louisa
    1997 Clitics and the structure-function mapping. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG97 Conferenceed. by. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  197. Sadock, Jerrold M.
    1980 Noun incorporation in Greenlandic: A case of syntactic word formation. Language56. 300–319. 10.1353/lan.1980.0036
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0036 [Google Scholar]
  198. 1986 Some notes on noun incorporation. Language62. 19–31. 10.1353/lan.1986.0077
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1986.0077 [Google Scholar]
  199. Sag, Ivan A.
    2005 Adverb extraction and coordination: A reply to Levine. In Stefan Müller (ed.), The Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 322–342. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  200. Sapir, Edward
    1911 The problem of noun incorporation in American languages. The American Anthropologist13. 250–282. 10.1525/aa.1911.13.2.02a00060
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1911.13.2.02a00060 [Google Scholar]
  201. Schmid, Helmut , Arne Fitschen & Ulrich Heid
    2004 SMOR: A German computational morphology covering derivation, composition and inflection. In Maria Teresa Lino , Maria Francisca Xavier , Fátima Ferreira , Rute Costa & Raquel Silva (eds.), Proceedings of the IVth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), 1263–1266. Lisbon, Portugal: European Language Resources Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  202. Selkirk, Elizabeth
    1984Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  203. 1986 On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook3. 371–405. 10.1017/S0952675700000695
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000695 [Google Scholar]
  204. 1995 The prosodic structure of function words. In Jill N. Beckman , Laura Walsh Dickey & Suzanne Urbanczyk (eds.), Papers in optimality theory, 439–469. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
    [Google Scholar]
  205. Sells, Peter
    1998 Scandinavian clause structure and object shift. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG98 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  206. 2000 Negation in Swedish: Where it’s not at. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG00 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  207. ed. 2001Formal and empirical issues in optimality theoretic syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  208. Simpson, Jane
    1991Warlpiri morpho-syntax. A lexicalist approach. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑3204‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3204-6 [Google Scholar]
  209. Soltész, Katalin
    1959Az ősi magyar igekötők (meg, el, ki, be, fel, le) [Ancient Hungarian preverbs (‘perf, away, out, in, up, down’)]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  210. Stiebels, Barbara
    1996Lexikalische Argumente und Adjunkte: Zum semantischen Beitrag von verbalen Präfixen und Partikeln. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. 10.1515/9783050072319
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783050072319 [Google Scholar]
  211. Stowell, Tim
    1978 What was there before there was there. In Donka Farkas , Wesley M. Jacobsen & Karol W. Todrys (eds.), Papers from the Fourteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 458–471. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  212. 1981 Origins of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  213. 1983 Subjects across categories. The Linguistic Review2. 285–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  214. 1991 Small clause restructuring. In Robert Freidin (ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative grammar, 182–218. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  215. Sulger, Sebastian
    2009 Irish clefting and information-structure. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG09 Conference, 562–582. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  216. 2011 A Parallel analysis of have-type copular constructions in have-less Indo-European languages. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG09 Conference, 299–319. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  217. Surányi, Balázs
    2002 Negation and the negativity of n-words in Hungarian. In István Kenesei & Péter Siptár (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume8. 107–132. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  218. 2003Multiple operator movements in Hungarian. Utrecht, Netherlands: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  219. 2006 Mechanisms of wh-saturation and interpretation in multiple wh-movement. In Lisa Cheng & Norbert Corver (eds.), Wh-movement: Moving on, 289–318. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  220. 2007 Focus structure and the interpretation of multiple questions. In Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds.), On information structure, meaning and form, 229–253. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.100.14sur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.100.14sur [Google Scholar]
  221. 2009a Incorporated locative adverbials in Hungarian. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Adverbs and adverbial adjuncts at the interfaces, 39–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214802.1.39
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214802.1.39 [Google Scholar]
  222. 2009b Preverbs, chain reduction, and phases. In Marcel den Dikken & Robert Vago (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 11. Papers from the 2007 New York conference, 217–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/atoh.11.10sur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.11.10sur [Google Scholar]
  223. 2009c Verbal particles inside and outside vP. Acta Linguistica Hungarica56. 201–249. 10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2‑3.3
    https://doi.org/10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2-3.3 [Google Scholar]
  224. 2011 An interface account of identificational focus movement. In Tibor Laczkó & Catherine O. Ringen (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume12. Papers from the 2009 Debrecen conference, 163–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/atoh.12.07sur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.12.07sur [Google Scholar]
  225. Svenonius, Peter
    1994 Dependent nexus. Subordinate predication structures in English and Scandinavian languages. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  226. Szabolcsi, Anna
    1980 Az aktuális mondattagolás szemantikájához [On the semantics of the discourse articulation of sentences]. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények82. 59–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  227. 1981 The semantics of topic-focus articulation. In Jeroen Groenendijk , Theo Janssen & Martin Stokhof (eds.), Formal methods in the study of language, 513–540. Amsterdam: Matematisch Centrum.
    [Google Scholar]
  228. 1992A birtokos szerkezet és az egzisztenciális mondat [The possessive construction and the existential sentence]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  229. 1994 The noun phrase. In Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian. Syntax and semantics27, 179–274. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004373174_004
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373174_004 [Google Scholar]
  230. 1997 Strategies for scope taking. In Anna Szabolcsi (ed.), ways of scope taking, 109–154. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5814‑5_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5814-5_4 [Google Scholar]
  231. Szendrői, Kriszta
    2001 Focus and the syntax-phonology interface. London, England: University College London dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  232. 2003 A stress-based approach to the syntax of Hungarian focus. The Linguistic Review20. 37–78. 10.1515/tlir.2003.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2003.002 [Google Scholar]
  233. 2004 A stress-based approach to climbing. In Katalin É. Kiss & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Verb clusters. A study of Hungarian, German and Dutch, 205–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.69.13sze
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.69.13sze [Google Scholar]
  234. Szécsényi, Tibor
    2009 Lokalitás és argumentumöröklés: A magyar infinitívuszi szerkezetek leírása HPSG keretben [Locality and argument inheritance: Hungarian infinitival constructions in HPSG]. Szeged, Hungary: University of Szeged dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  235. 2011 Magyar mondatszerkezeti jelenségek elemzése HPSG-ben [Hungarian sentence structure in HPSG]. In Huba Bartos (ed.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XXIII: Új irányok és eredmények a mondattani kutatásban, 99–138. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  236. 2013 Argument inheritance and left periphery in Hungarian infinitival constructions. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 203–221. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  237. Szilágyi, Éva
    2008 The rank(s) of a totally lexicalist syntax. In Kata Balogh (ed.), Proceedings of the 13th ESSLLI [European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information] Student Session, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, 175–183. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  238. Szilágyi, Éva , Judit Kleiber & Gábor Alberti
    2007 A totálisan lexikalista szintaxis rangja(i) [Ranks in a totally lexicalist syntax]. In Attila Tanács & Dóra Csendes (eds.), V. Magyar Számítógépes Nyelvészeti Konferencia – MSZNY 2007 [5th Hungarian Conference on Computational Linguistics], 284–287. Szeged, Hungary: Juhász Nyomda.
    [Google Scholar]
  239. Toivonen, Ida
    2001 The phrase structure of non-projecting words. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  240. 2003Non-projecting words: A case study of Swedish particles. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑010‑0053‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0053-6 [Google Scholar]
  241. Trón, Viktor
    2001Fejközpontú frázisstruktúra-nyelvtan [Head-driven phrase structure grammar]. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  242. Ürögdi, Barbara
    2003 Feature doubling, aspectual structure, and expletives. In Shigeto Kawahara & Makoto Kadowaki (eds.), Proceedings of NELS [ North East Linguistic Society ] 33, 425–444. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
    [Google Scholar]
  243. Varga, László
    1982 Két szintaktikai pozícióról [On two syntactic positions]. Magyar Nyelv78. 150–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  244. 2002Intonation and stress: Evidence from Hungarian. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230505827
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230505827 [Google Scholar]
  245. Vogel, Irene
    1988 Prosodic constituents in Hungarian. In Pier Marco Bertinetto & Michele Loporcaro (eds.), Certamen Phonologicum: Papers from the 1987 Cortona Phonology Meeting, 231–250. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.
    [Google Scholar]
  246. Vogel, Irene & István Kenesei
    1987 The interface between phonology and other components of grammar: The case of Hungarian. Phonology Yearbook4. 243–263. 10.1017/S0952675700000853
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000853 [Google Scholar]
  247. Williams, Edwin
    1980 Predication. Linguistic Inquiry11. 203–238.
    [Google Scholar]
  248. 1983 Semantic vs. syntactic categories. Linguistics and Philosophy6. 423–466. 10.1007/BF00627484
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00627484 [Google Scholar]
  249. Woolford, Ellen
    1991 VP-internal subjects in VSO and nonconfigurational languages. Linguistic Inquiry22. 503–540.
    [Google Scholar]
  250. Zwart, Jan-Wouter
    1993 Dutch syntax: A minimalist approach. Groningen, Netherlands: University of Groningen dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/books/9789027258984
Loading
/content/books/9789027258984
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027258984
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error