Wh-clefts as evidence of resultatives in ASL

References

1. Aarons, Debra
   1996 Topics and topicalization in American Sign Language. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics30. 65–106.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Aarts, Bas
   1992 Small clauses in English: The nonverbal types. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110861457
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110861457 [Google Scholar]
3. Benedicto, Elena & Diane Brentari
   2004 Where did all the arguments go?: Argument changing properties of classifiers in ASL. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory22(4). 743–810.10.1007/s11049‑003‑4698‑2
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-003-4698-2 [Google Scholar]
4. Bernath, Jeffrey L.
   2010 Adjectives in ASL. Paper presented atTISLR 10, West Lafayette, IN.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Boas, Hans Christian
   2003 A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Brentari, Diane
   1998 A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Chomsky, Noam
   1955/75 The logical structure of linguistic theory. Boston: MIT Press / Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Dudis, Paul
   2004 Depiction of events in ASL: Conceptual integration of temporal components. Berkeley, CA: UC BerkeleyPhD dissertation.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Eccarius, Petra & Diane Brentari
   2008 Handshape coding made easier: A theoretically based notation for phonological transcription. Sign Language & Linguistics11(1). 69–101.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Fischer, Susan D.
    1973 Two processes of reduplication in the American Sign Language. Foundations of Language9(4). 469–480.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Gökgöz, Kadir
    2013 The nature of object marking in American Sign Language. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue UniversityPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Goldberg, Adele E. & Ray Jackendoff
    2004 The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language80(3). 532–568.10.1353/lan.2004.0129
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0129 [Google Scholar]
13. Hoekstra, Teun
    1988 Small clause results. Lingua74(2–3). 101–139.10.1016/0024‑3841(88)90056‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(88)90056-3 [Google Scholar]
14. Kegl, Judy
    1990 Predicate argument structure and verb-class organization in the ASL lexicon. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 149–175. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Kennedy, Christopher & Louise McNally
    2005 Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language81(2). 345–381.10.1353/lan.2005.0071
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0071 [Google Scholar]
16. Kentner, Ashley
    2014 Event structure of resultatives in ASL. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue UniversityMA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi
    1979 The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Kratzer, Angelika
    2005 Building resultatives. In Claudia Maienborn & Angelika Wöllstein (eds.), Event arguments, 177–212. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.10.1515/9783110913798.177
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110913798.177 [Google Scholar]
19. Liddell, Scott K.
    1978 Nonmanual signals and relative clauses in American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 59–90. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Lillo-Martin, Diane
    1986 Two kinds of null arguments in American Sign Language. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory4(4). 415–444.10.1007/BF00134469
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00134469 [Google Scholar]
21. Loos, Cornelia
    2017 The syntax and semantics of resultative constructions in Deutsche Gebärdensprache (DGS) and American Sign Language (ASL). Austin, TX: The University of Texas at AustinPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Müller, Stefan
    2002 Complex predicates: verbal complexes, resultative constructions, and particle verbs in German. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Napoli, Donna Jo
    1992 Secondary resultative predicates in Italian. Journal of Linguistics28(1). 53–90.10.1017/S0022226700014997
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700014997 [Google Scholar]
24. Padden, Carol
    1988 Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. New York: Garland.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Pfau, Roland , Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll
    (eds.) 2012 Sign language: An international handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261325
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261325 [Google Scholar]
26. Pustejovsky, James
    1991 The syntax of event structure. Cognition41(1). 47–81.10.1016/0010‑0277(91)90032‑Y
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90032-Y [Google Scholar]
27. Ramchand, Gillian
    2008 Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first-phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486319
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486319 [Google Scholar]
28. Rathmann, Christian Georg
    2005 Event structure in American Sign Language. Austin, TX: University of Texas at AustinPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Ross, John Robert
    1967 Constraints on variables in syntax. Cambridge, MA: MITPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Shepard-Kegl, Judy Anne
    1985 Locative relations in American Sign Language word formation, syntax and discourse. Cambridge, MA: MITPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Snyder, William
    1995 Language acquisition and language variation: The role of morphology. Cambridge, MA: MITPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Snyder, William
    2001 On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language77(2). 324–342.10.1353/lan.2001.0108
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2001.0108 [Google Scholar]
33. Stewart, Osamuyimen T.
    1998 The serial verb construction parameter. Montreal: McGill UniversityPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Stowell, Tim
    1981 Origins of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MITPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Stowell, Tim
    1983 Subjects across categories. The Linguistic Review2(3), 285–312.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Wechsler, Stephen
    2001 An analysis of English resultatives under the event-argument homomorphism model of telicity. InProceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Text Structure. Austin: University of Texas Linguistics Department.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Wechsler, Stephen
    2005 Resultatives under the ‘event-argument homomorphism’ model of telicity. In Nomi Erteschik-Shir & Tova Rapoport (eds.), The syntax of aspect: Deriving thematic and aspectual interpretation, 255–273. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199280445.003.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199280445.003.0012 [Google Scholar]
38. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    1996 Evidence for the function and structure of WH-clefts in American Sign Language. In William H. Edmondson & Ronnie B. Wilbur (eds.), International review of sign linguistics, 209–256. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    2005 A reanalysis of reduplication in American Sign Language. In Bernhard Hurch (ed.), Studies in reduplication, 593–620. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110911466.595
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110911466.595 [Google Scholar]
40. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    2008 Complex predicates involving events, time and aspect: Is this why sign languages look so similar?InJosep Quer (ed.), Signs of the time, 217–250. Hamburg: Signum.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    2009 Productive reduplication in a fundamentally monosyllabic language. Language Sciences31(2). 325–342.10.1016/j.langsci.2008.12.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2008.12.017 [Google Scholar]
42. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    2011 Nonmanuals, semantic operators, domain marking, and the solution to two outstanding puzzles in ASL. Sign Language & Linguistics14(1). 148–178.10.1075/sll.14.1.08wil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.14.1.08wil [Google Scholar]
43. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    2017 Internally-headed relative clauses in sign languages. Glossa2(1). 101–410.10.5334/gjgl.183
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.183 [Google Scholar]
44. Wilbur, Ronnie B. , Evie Malaia & Robin A. Shay
    2012 Degree modification and intensification in American Sign Language adjectives. In Maria Aloni , Vadim Kimmelman , Floris Roelofsen , Galit Sassoon , Katrin Schulz & Matthijs Westera (eds.), Logic, language and meaning, 92–101. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978‑3‑642‑31482‑7_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31482-7_10 [Google Scholar]
45. Wright, Tony
    2014 Strict v. flexible accomplishment predicates. Austin, TX: University of Texas at AustinPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]