The CoreGram Project : theoretical linguistics, theory development, and verification

• Autorzy: Müller S.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15398/jlm.v3i1.91

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper describes the CoreGram project, a multilingual grammar engineering project that develops HPSG grammars for several typologically diverse languages that share a common core. The paper provides a general motivation for doing theoretical linguistics the way it is done in the CoreGram project, and is therefore not exclusively targeted at computational linguists. I argue for a constraint-based approach to language rather than a generative-enumerative one and discuss issues of formalization. Recent advantages in language acquisition research are mentioned and conclusions on how theories should be constructed are drawn. The paper discusses some of the highlights in the implemented grammars, gives a brief overview of central theoretical concepts and their implementation in the TRALE system, and compares the CoreGram project with other multilingual grammar engineering projects.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Universal Grammar; HPSG; Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar; multilingual grammar engineering; TRALE; theoretical linguistics

• Wydawca: Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN
• Czasopismo: Journal of Language Modelling
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: Vol. 3, No. 1
• Strony: 21--86
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 233 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Müller S.

• German Grammar Group, Institut für Deutsche und Niederländische Philologie, Freie Universität Berlin

Bibliografia

• [1] Steven P. Abney (1996), Statistical methods and linguistics, in Judith L. Klavans and Philip Resnik, editors, The Balancing Act: Combining Symbolic and Statistical Approaches to Language, Language, Speech, and Communication, pp. 1-26, MIT Press.
• [2] Steven P. Abney and Jennifer Cole (1986), A government-binding parser, Proceedings of North Eastern Linguistic Society, 16: 1-17.
• [3] Mansour Alotaibi and Robert D. Borsley (2013), Gaps and resumptive pronouns in Modern Standard Arabic, in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 6-26, http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2013/alotaibi-borsley.pdf.
• [4] Ben Ambridge and Adele E. Goldberg (2008), The island status of clausal complements: Evidence in favor of an information structure explanation, Cognitive Linguistics, 19: 349-381, http://www.princeton.edu/~adele/Publications_files/08Ambridge%26Goldberg-islands.pdf.
• [5] Joseph Aoun and Dominique Sportiche (1983), On the formal theory of government, The Linguistic Review, 2 (3): 211-236.
• [6] Mohammad Bahrani, Hossein Sameti, and Mehdi Hafezi Manshadi (2011), A computational grammar for Persian based on GPSG, Language Resources and Evaluation, 45 (4): 387-408.
• [7] Colin Bannard, Elena Lieven, and Michael Tomasello (2009), Modeling children’s early grammatical knowledge, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 (41): 17284-17289.
• [8] Emily Bender and Daniel P. Flickinger (1999), Peripheral constructions and core phenomena: Agreement in tag questions, in Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre Koenig, and Andreas Kathol, editors, Lexical and Constructional Aspects of Linguistic Explanation, number 1 in Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism, pp. 199-214, CSLI Publications.
• [9] Emily M. Bender (2000), Syntactic Variation and Linguistic Competence: The Case of AAVE Copula Absence, Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, http://faculty.washington.edu/ebender/dissertation/.
• [10] Emily M. Bender (2008), Grammar engineering for linguistic hypothesis testing, in Proceedings of the Texas Linguistics Society X Conference: Computational Linguistics for Less-Studied Languages, pp. 16-36.
• [11] Emily M. Bender and Daniel P. Flickinger (2005), Rapid prototyping of scalable grammars: Towards modularity in extensions to a language-independent core, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing IJCNLP-05 (Posters/Demos), http://turing.cs.washington.edu/papers/modules05.pdf.
• [12] Emily M. Bender, Daniel P. Flickinger, and Stephan Oepen (2002), The grammar matrix: An open-source starter-kit for the rapid development of cross-linguistically consistent broad-coverage precision grammars, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Grammar Engineering and Evaluation at COLING 2002, pp. 8-14.
• [13] Benjamin K. Bergen and Nancy Chang (2005), Embodied Construction Grammar in simulation-based language understanding, in Jan-Ola Östman and Mirjam Fried, editors, Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, pp. 147-190, John Benjamins Publishing Co.
• [14] Robert C. Berwick, Paul Pietroski, Beracah Yankama, and Noam Chomsky (2011), Poverty of the stimulus revisited, Cognitive Science, 35 (7): 1207-1242.
• [15] Manfred Bierwisch (1963), Grammatik des deutschen Verbs [The Grammar of the German Verb], number 2 in studia grammatica, Akademie Verlag.
• [16] Mahmood Bijankhan (2004), The role of corpora in writing a grammar [article in Persian], Iranian Journal of Linguistics, 19 (2): 48-67.
• [17] Felix Bildhauer (2008), Representing Information Structure in an HPSG Grammar of Spanish, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Bremen.
• [18] Felix Bildhauer and Philippa Cook (2010), German multiple fronting and expected topic-hood, in Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 68-79.
• [19] Rens Bod (2009), From exemplar to grammar: Integrating analogy and probability in language learning, Cognitive Science, 33 (4): 752-793, http://staff.science.uva.nl/~rens/analogy.pdf.
• [20] Olivier Bonami and Danièle Godard (2001), Inversion du sujet, constituance et ordre des mots, in Jean-Marie Marandin, editor, Cahier Jean-Claude Milner, pp. 117-174, Editions Verdier.
• [21] Olivier Bonami, Daniele Godard, and Jean-Marie Marandin (1998), French subject inversion in extraction contexts, Proceedings of FHCG, 98: 101-112.
• [22] Robert D. Borsley (2004), An approach to English comparative correlatives, in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 70-92.
• [23] Gosse Bouma, Robert Malouf, and Ivan A. Sag (2001), Satisfying constraints on extraction and adjunction, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 19 (1): 1-65, http://ftp-linguistics.stanford.edu/sag/bms-nllt.pdf.
• [24] Joan Bresnan and Sam A. Mchombo (1995), The lexical integrity principle: Evidence from Bantu, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 13: 181-254.
• [25] Ted J. Briscoe and Ann Copestake (1999), Lexical rules in constraint-based grammar, Computational Linguistics, 25 (4): 487-526, http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/J/J99/J99-4002.pdf.
• [26] Miriam Butt, Helge Dyvik, Tracy Holloway King, Hiroshi Masuichi, and Christian Rohrer (2002), The parallel grammar project, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Grammar Engineering and Evaluation at COLING 2002, pp. 1-7.
• [27] Miriam Butt, Tracy Holloway King, María-Eugenia Niño, and Frédérique Segond (1999), A Grammar Writer’s Cookbook, number 95 in CSLI Lecture, CSLI Publications.
• [28] Noam Chomsky (1957), Syntactic Structures, number 4 in Janua Linguarum, Series Minor, Mouton.
• [29] Noam Chomsky (1959), On certain formal properties of grammars, Information and Control, 2 (2): 137-167.
• [30] Noam Chomsky (1964), Degrees of grammaticalness, in Jerry A. Fodor and Jerrold J. Katz, editors, The Structure of Language, pp. 384-389, Prentice-Hall.
• [31] Noam Chomsky (1968), Language and the mind, Psychology Today, 1 (9): 48-68, Reprint as: Chomsky 1976.
• [32] Noam Chomsky (1971), Problems of Knowledge and Freedom, Fontana.
• [33] Noam Chomsky (1975), The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, Plenum Press.
• [34] Noam Chomsky (1976), Language and the mind, in Diane D. Borstein, editor, Readings in the Theory of Grammar: From the 17th to the 20th Century, pp. 241-251, Winthrop, Reprint from: Chomsky 1968.
• [35] Noam Chomsky (1981), Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris Publications.
• [36] Noam Chomsky (1990), On formalization and formal linguistics, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 8 (1): 143-147.
• [37] Noam Chomsky (1995), The Minimalist Program, number 28 in Current Studies in Linguistics, MIT Press.
• [38] Noam Chomsky (2001), Derivation by phase, in Michael Kenstowicz, editor, Ken Hale. A Life in Language, pp. 1-52, MIT Press.
• [39] Noam Chomsky (2007), Approaching UG from below, in Uli Sauerland and Hans-Martin Gärtner, editors, Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Chomsky’s Minimalism and the View from Syntax-Semantics, number 89 in Studies in Generative Grammar, pp. 1-29, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [40] Noam Chomsky (2008), On phases, in Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, and Maria Luisa Zubizarreta, editors, Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory. Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, pp. 133-166, MIT Press.
• [41] Noam Chomsky (2013), Problems of projection, Lingua, 130: 33-49.
• [42] Guglielmo Cinque (1999), Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Oxford University Press.
• [43] Guglielmo Cinque and Luigi Rizzi (2010), The cartography of syntactic structures, in Bernd Heine and Heiko Narrog, editors, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, pp. 51-65, Oxford University Press.
• [44] Charles Jr. Clifton and Penelope Odom (1966), Similarity relations among certain English sentence constructions, Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80 (5): 1-35.
• [45] Ann Copestake (2002), Implementing Typed Feature Structure Grammars, number 110 in CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI Publications.
• [46] Ann Copestake, Daniel P. Flickinger, Carl J. Pollard, and Ivan A. Sag (2005), Minimal Recursion Semantics: An introduction, Research on Language and Computation, 4 (3): 281-332, http://lingo.stanford.edu/sag/papers/copestake.pdf.
• [47] Nelson Correa (1987), An attribute-grammar implementation of Government-Binding Theory, in Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 45-51, http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/P/P87/P87-1007.pdf.
• [48] Matthew Walter Crocker and Ian Lewin (1992), Parsing as deduction: Rules versus principles, in Proceedings of the l0th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 508-512.
• [49] William Croft (2001), Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective, Oxford University Press.
• [50] Berthold Crysmann (2003), On the efficient implementation of German verb placement in HPSG, in Proceedings of RANLP 2003, pp. 112-116.
• [51] Peter W. Culicover (1999), Syntactic Nuts: Hard Cases, Syntactic Theory, and Language Acquisition, volume 1 of Foundations of Syntax, Oxford University Press.
• [52] Peter W. Culicover and Ray S. Jackendoff (2005), Simpler Syntax, Oxford University Press.
• [53] Kordula De Kuthy (2002), Discontinuous NPs in German, number 14 in Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism, CSLI Publications.
• [54] Johannes Dellert, Kilian Evang, and Frank Richter (2010), Kahina, a debugging framework for logic programs and TRALE, presentation at the 17th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar.
• [55] Johannes Dellert, Kilian Evang, and Frank Richter (2013), Kahina: A hybrid trace-based and chart-based debugging system for grammar engineering, in Proceedings of the Workshop on High-level Methodologies for Grammar Engineering (HMGE 2013), pp. 75-86.
• [56] David R. Dowty (1979), Word Meaning and Montague Grammar, number 7 in Synthese Language Library, D. Reidel Publishing Company.
• [57] David R. Dowty (1991), Thematic proto-roles and argument selection, Language, 67 (3): 547-619.
• [58] Matthew S. Dryer (1997), Are grammatical relations universal?, in Joan Bybee, John Haiman, and Sandra Thompson, editors, Essays on Language Function and Language Type: Dedicated to T. Givon, pp. 115-143, John Benjamins Publishing Co.
• [59] Markus Egg (1999), Derivation and resolution of ambiguities in wieder-sentences, in Proceedings of the 12th Amsterdam Colloquium, pp. 109-114.
• [60] Peter Eisenberg (1992), Platos Problem und die Lernbarkeit der Syntax [Plato’s problem and the learnability of syntax], in Peter Suchsland, editor, Biologische und soziale Grundlagen der Sprache, number 280 in Linguistische Arbeiten, pp. 371-378, Max Niemeyer Verlag.
• [61] Elisabet Engdahl and Enric Vallduví (1994), Information packaging and grammar architecture: A constraint-based approach, in Elisabet Engdahl, editor, Integrating Information Structure into Constraint-Based and Categorial Approaches, pp. 39-79, ILLC, DYANA-2 Report R.1.3.B.
• [62] Elisabet Engdahl and Enric Vallduví (1996), Information packaging in HPSG, in Claire Grover and Enric Vallduví, editors, Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science, Vol. 12: Studies in HPSG, chapter 1, pp. 1-32, Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh, ftp://ftp.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/pub/CCS-WPs/wp-12.ps.gz.
• [63] Bruno Estigarribia (2009), Facilitation by variation: Right-to-left learning of English yes/no questions, Cognitive Science, 34 (1): 68-93.
• [64] Nicholas Evans and Stephen C. Levinson (2009), The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32 (5): 429-448.
• [65] Arnold Evers (1975), The Transformational Cycle in Dutch and German, Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht.
• [66] Ray Fabri (1993), Kongruenz und die Grammatik des Maltesischen [Agreement and the Grammar of Maltese], number 292 in Linguistische Arbeiten, Max Niemeyer Verlag.
• [67] Gisbert Fanselow (2001), Features, θ-roles, and free constituent order, Linguistic Inquiry, 32 (3): 405-437.
• [68] Gisbert Fanselow (2009), Die (generative) Syntax in den Zeiten der Empiriediskussion [(Generative) syntax in the times of the empirical evidence discussion], Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 28 (1): 133-139.
• [69] Janet Dean Fodor (1998), Unambiguous triggers, Linguistic Inquiry, 29 (1): 1-36.
• [70] Janet Dean Fodor (2001), Parameters and the periphery: Reflections on syntactic nuts, Journal of Linguistics, 37: 367-392.
• [71] Jerry A. Fodor, Thomas G. Bever, and Merrill F. Garrett (1974), The Psychology of Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics and Generative Grammar, McGraw-Hill Book Co.
• [72] Sandiway Fong (1991), Computational Properties of Principle-Based Grammatical Theories, Ph.D. thesis, MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab, http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/sandiway/pappi/index.html.
• [73] Sandiway Fong (2014), Unification and efficient computation in the Minimalist Program, in L. Francis and L. Laurent, editors, Language and Recursion, pp. 129-138, Springer Verlag.
• [74] Sandiway Fong and Jason Ginsburg (2012), Computation with doubling constituents: Pronouns and antecedents in phase theory, in Anna Maria Di Sciullo, editor, Towards a Biolinguistic Understanding of Grammar: Essays on Interfaces, number 194 in Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, pp. 303-338, John Benjamins Publishing Co.
• [75] Andrew Fordham and Matthew Walter Crocker (1994), Parsing with principles and probabilities, in Proceedings of the Workshop “The Balancing Act: Combining Symbolic and Statistical Approaches to Language”, pp. 37-42.
• [76] Robert Freidin (1997), Review article: The Minimalist Program, Language, 73 (3): 571-582.
• [77] Daniel Freudenthal, Julian M. Pine, and Fernand Gobet (2006), Modeling the development of children’s use of optional infinitives in Dutch and English using MOSAIC, Cognitive Science, 30 (2): 277-310.
• [78] Daniel Freudenthal, Julian M. Pine, and Fernand Gobet (2009), Simulating the referential properties of Dutch, German, and English root infinitives in MOSAIC, Language Learning and Development, 5 (1): 1-29.
• [79] Joyce Friedman (1969), Applications of a computer system for Transformational Grammar, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics 1969.
• [80] Joyce Friedman, Thomas H. Bredt, Robert W. Doran, Bary W. Pollack, and Theodore S. Martner (1971), A Computer Model of Transformational Grammar, number 9 in Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Language Processing, Elsevier.
• [81] Gerald Gazdar, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey K. Pullum, and Ivan A. Sag (1985), Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Harvard University Press.
• [82] Edward Gibson (1998), Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies, Cognition, 68 (1): 1-76.
• [83] Jonathan Ginzburg and Ivan A. Sag (2000), Interrogative Investigations: the Form, Meaning, and Use of English Interrogatives, number 123 in CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI Publications.
• [84] Mark E. Gold (1967), Language identification in the limit, Information and Control, 10 (5): 447-474.
• [85] Adele E. Goldberg (2013), Argument structure constructions vs. lexical rules or derivational verb templates, Mind and Language, 28 (4): 435-465.
• [86] Günther Grewendorf (1988), Aspekte der deutschen Syntax. Eine Rektions-Bindungs-Analyse [Aspcets of German Syntax. A Govenment and Binding Analysis], number 33 in Studien zur deutschen Grammatik, originally Gunter Narr Verlag now Stauffenburg Verlag.
• [87] Takao Gunji (1986), Subcategorization and word order, in William J. Poser, editor, Papers from the Second International Workshop on Japanese Syntax, pp. 1-21, CSLI Publications.
• [88] Hubert Haider (1986), Fehlende Argumente: vom Passiv zu kohärenten Infinitiven [Missing arguments: from passive to coherent infinitives], Linguistische Berichte, 101: 3-33.
• [89] Daniel Harbour (2011), Mythomania? methods and morals from ‘the myth of language universals’, Lingua, 121 (12): 1820-1830.
• [90] Martin Haspelmath (2010a), Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies, Language, 86 (3): 663-687.
• [91] Martin Haspelmath (2010b), The interplay between comparative concepts and descriptive categories (reply to Newmeyer), Language, 86 (3): 696-699.
• [92] Petter Haugereid, Nurit Melnik, and Shuly Wintner (2013), Nonverbal predicates in Modern Hebrew, in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 69-89, http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2013/hmw.pdf.
• [93] Marc D. Hauser, Noam Chomsky, and W. Tecumseh Fitch (2002), The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?, Science, 298: 1569-1579, doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569, http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20021122.pdf.
• [94] Wolfgang Heinz and Johannes Matiasek (1994), Argument structure and case assignment in German, in John Nerbonne, Klaus Netter, and Carl J. Pollard, editors, German in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, number 46 in CSLI Lecture Notes, pp. 199-236, CSLI Publications.
• [95] Erhard W. Hinrichs and Tsuneko Nakazawa (1994), Linearizing AUXs in German verbal complexes, in John Nerbonne, Klaus Netter, and Carl J. Pollard, editors, German in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, number 46 in CSLI Lecture Notes, pp. 11-38, CSLI Publications.
• [96] Anders Holmberg (1999), Remarks on Holmberg’s generalization, Studia Linguistica, 53 (1): 1-39.
• [97] Norbert Hornstein, Jairo Nunes, and Kleantes K. Grohmann (2005), Understanding Minimalism, Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics, Cambridge University Press.
• [98] Ray S. Jackendoff (1997), The Architecture of the Language Faculty, number 28 in Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, MIT Press.
• [99] Ray S. Jackendoff (1999), Parallel constraint-based generative theories of language, Trends in Cognitive Science, 3 (10): 393-400.
• [100] Ray S. Jackendoff (2008), Construction after construction and its theoretical challenges, Language, 84 (1): 8-28.
• [101] Ray S. Jackendoff (2011), What is the human language faculty? Two views, Language, 87 (3): 586-624.
• [102] Ray S. Jackendoff and Steven Pinker (2005), The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language (reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky), Cognition, 97 (2): 211-225.
• [103] Joachim Jacobs (2008), Wozu Konstruktionen? [Why constructions?], Linguistische Berichte, 213: 3-44.
• [104] Gerhard Jäger and Reinhard Blutner (2003), Competition and interpretation: The German adverb wieder (“again”), in Ewald Lang, Claudia Maienborn, and Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen, editors, Modifying Adjuncts, number 4 in Interface Explorations, pp. 393-416, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [105] Kent Johnson (2004), Gold’s theorem and cognitive science, Philosophy of Science, 71 (4): 571-592.
• [106] Ronald M. Kaplan, Tracy Holloway King, and John T. Maxwell III (2002), Adapting existing grammars: The XLE approach, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Grammar Engineering and Evaluation at COLING 2002, pp. 29-35, http://www2.parc.com/isl/groups/nltt/pargram/kaplanetal-coling02.pdf.
• [107] Gholamhossein Karimi-Doostan (1997), Light Verb Constructions in Persian, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex.
• [108] Martin Kay (2011), Zipf’s law and L’Arbitraire du Signe, Linguistic Issues in Language Technology, 6 (8): Special Issue on Interaction of Linguistics and Computational Linguistics, http://elanguage.net/journals/index.php/lilt/issue/view/330.
• [109] Richard S. Kayne (1994), The Antisymmetry of Syntax, number 25 in Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, MIT Press.
• [110] Edward L. Keenan and Bernard Comrie (1977), Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar, Linguistic Inquiry, 8 (1): 63-99.
• [111] Tibor Kiss (1995), Infinite Komplementation. Neue Studien zum deutschen Verbum infinitum [Non-finite Complementation. New Studies on the German Non-Finite Verb], number 333 in Linguistische Arbeiten, Max Niemeyer Verlag.
• [112] Jean-Pierre Koenig and Anthony R. Davis (2004), Raising doubts about Russian impersonals, in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar.
• [113] Jean-Pierre Koenig and Karin Michelson (2012), The (non)universality of syntactic selection and functional application, in Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, volume 9, pp. 185-205.
• [114] Hans-Peter Kolb (1997), GB blues: Two essays on procedures and structures in generative syntax, Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 No. 110, Eberhard-Karls-Universität, Tübingen.
• [115] Hans-Peter Kolb and Craig L. Thiersch (1991), Levels and empty categories in a Principles and Parameters based approach to parsing, in Hubert Haider and Klaus Netter, editors, Representation and Derivation in the Theory of Grammar, number 22 in Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• [116] Alexander Koller and Stefan Thater (2005), Efficient solving and exploration of scope ambiguities, in Proceedings of the ACL Interactive Poster and Demonstration Sessions, pp. 9-12, http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/P/P05/P05-3003.pdf.
• [117] Ekkehard König and Claire Moyse-Faurie (2009), Spatial reciprocity: Between grammar and lexis, in Johannes Helmbrecht, Yoko Nishina, Yong-Min Shin, Stavros Skopeteas, and Elisabeth Verhoeven, editors, Form and Function in Language Research: Papers in Honour of Christian Lehmann, number 210 in Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, pp. 57-68, de Gruyter.
• [118] András Kornai and Geoffrey K. Pullum (1990), The X-bar Theory of phrase structure, Language, 66 (1): 24-50.
• [119] Jonas Kuhn (2007), Interfaces in constraint-based theories of grammar, in Gillian Ramchand and Charles Reiss, editors, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, pp. 613-650, Oxford University Press.
• [120] Robert J. Kuhns (1986), A PROLOG implementation of Government-Binding Theory, in Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 546-550.
• [121] Marie Labelle (2007), Biolinguistics, the Minimalist Program, and psycholinguistic reality, Snippets, 14, http://www.ledonline.it/snippets/.
• [122] Shalom Lappin, Robert D. Levine, and David E. Johnson (2000), The revolution confused: A response to our critics, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 18 (4): 873-890.
• [123] Robert D. Levine and Thomas E. Hukari (2006), The Unity of Unbounded Dependency Constructions, number 166 in CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI Publications.
• [124] Charles N. Li and Sandra A. Thompson (1981), Mandarin Chinese. A Functional Reference Grammar, University of California Press.
• [125] Janna Lipenkova (2009), Serienverbkonstruktionen im Chinesischen und ihre Analyse im Rahmen von HPSG [Serial Verb Constructions in Chinese and their Analysis in the Framework of HPSG], Master’s thesis, Institut für Sinologie, Freie Universität Berlin, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~lipenkov/magister.html.
• [126] Horst Lohnstein (1993), Projektion und Linking. Ein prinzipienbasierter Parser fürs Deutsche [Projection and Linking. A Principle-Based Parser for German], number 287 in Linguistische Arbeiten, Max Niemeyer Verlag.
• [127] Alec Marantz (2005), Generative linguistics within the cognitive neuroscience of language, The Linguistic Review, 22 (2-4): 429-445.
• [128] Mitchell P. Marcus (1980), A Theory of Syntactic Recognition for Natural Language, MIT Press.
• [129] William Marslen-Wilson (1975), Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process, Science, 189 (4198): 226-228.
• [130] Nurit Melnik (2007), From “hand-written” to computationally implemented HPSG theories, Research on Language and Computation, 5 (2): 199-236.
• [131] Walt D. Meurers, Kordula De Kuthy, and Vanessa Metcalf (2003), Modularity of grammatical constraints in HPSG-based grammar implementations, in Proceedings of the ESSLLI 2003 Workshop “Ideas and Strategies for Multilingual Grammar Development”, pp. 83-90, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~dm/papers/meurers-dekuthy-metcalf-03.html.
• [132] Walt Detmar Meurers (1999a), German partial-VP fronting revisited, in Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre Koenig, and Andreas Kathol, editors, Lexical and Constructional Aspects of Linguistic Explanation, number 1 in Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism, pp. 129-144, CSLI Publications, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~dm/papers/hpsg-volume98/pvp-revisited.html.
• [133] Walt Detmar Meurers (1999b), Lexical Generalizations in the Syntax of German Non-Finite Constructions, Ph.D. thesis, Eberhard-Karls-Universität, Tübingen.
• [134] Walt Detmar Meurers (1999c), Raising spirits (and assigning them case), Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik (GAGL), 43: 173-226, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~dm/papers/gagl99.html.
• [135] Walt Detmar Meurers (2000), Lexical generalizations in the syntax of German non-finite constructions, Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 No. 145, Eberhard-Karls-Universität, Tübingen, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~dm/papers/diss.html.
• [136] Walt Detmar Meurers (2001), On expressing lexical generalizations in HPSG, Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 24 (2): 161-217, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~dm/papers/lexical-generalizations.html.
• [137] Walt Detmar Meurers, Gerald Penn, and Frank Richter (2002), A web-based instructional platform for constraint-based grammar formalisms and parsing, in Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching NLP and CL, pp. 18-25, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~dm/papers/acl02.html, proceedings of the Workshop held at 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Philadelphia, PA.
• [138] George A. Miller and Kathryn Ojemann McKean (1964), A chronometric study of some relations between sentences, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16 (4): 297-308.
• [139] Yves Ch. Morin (1973), A computer tested Transformational Grammar of French, Linguistics, 116 (11): 49-114.
• [140] Gereon Müller (1998), Incomplete Category Fronting. A Derivational Approach to Remnant Movement in German, number 42 in Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• [141] Gereon Müller (2011), Regeln oder Konstruktionen? Von verblosen Direktiven zur sequentiellen Nominalreduplikation [Rules or constructions? From verbless directives to sequential nominal reduplication], in Stefan Engelberg, Anke Holler, and Kristel Proost, editors, Sprachliches Wissen zwischen Lexikon und Grammatik, Institut für Deutsche Sprache, Jahrbuch 2010, pp. 211-249, de Gruyter, http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~muellerg/mu242.pdf.
• [142] Stefan Müller (1999), Deutsche Syntax deklarativ. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar für das Deutsche [German Syntax Declarative. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar for German], number 394 in Linguistische Arbeiten, Max Niemeyer Verlag, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/hpsg.html.
• [143] Stefan Müller (2002), Complex Predicates: Verbal Complexes, Resultative Constructions, and Particle Verbs in German, number 13 in Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism, CSLI Publications, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/complex.html.
• [144] Stefan Müller (2003a), Mehrfache Vorfeldbesetzung [Multiple frontings], Deutsche Sprache, 31 (1): 29-62, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/mehr-vf-ds.html.
• [145] Stefan Müller (2003b), Solving the bracketing paradox: an analysis of the morphology of German particle verbs, Journal of Linguistics, 39 (2): 275-325, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/paradox.html.
• [146] Stefan Müller (2004), Example sentences and making them useful for theoretical and computational linguistics, Presentation at the DGfS Jahrestagung: AG Empirische Fundierung der Modellbildung in der Syntax, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/PS/b-ger-ts-dgfs-2004-slides.pdf.
• [147] Stefan Müller (2005), Zur Analyse der deutschen Satzstruktur [Towards the analysis of the German sentence structure], Linguistische Berichte, 201: 3-39, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/satz-lb.html.
• [148] Stefan Müller (2006), Phrasal or lexical constructions?, Language, 82 (4): 850-883, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/phrasal.html.
• [149] Stefan Müller (2007a), The Grammix CD Rom: A software collection for developing typed feature structure grammars, in Tracy Holloway King and Emily M. Bender, editors, Grammar Engineering across Frameworks 2007, Studies in Computational Linguistics ONLINE, CSLI Publications.
• [150] Stefan Müller (2007b), Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar: Eine Einführung, number 17 in Stauffenburg Einführungen, Stauffenburg Verlag, 1st edition, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/hpsg-lehrbuch.html.
• [151] Stefan Müller (2008), Depictive secondary predicates in German and English, in Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel, and Winfried Boeder, editors, Secondary Predicates in Eastern European Languages and Beyond, number 16 in Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia, pp. 255-273, BIS-Verlag, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/depiktiv-2006.html.
• [152] Stefan Müller (2009a), A Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar for Maltese, in Bernard Comrie, Ray Fabri, Beth Hume, Manwel Mifsud, Thomas Stolz, and Martine Vanhove, editors, Introducing Maltese Linguistics: Papers from the 1st International Conference on Maltese Linguistics, number 113 in Studies in Language Companion Series, pp. 83-112, John Benjamins Publishing Co., http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/maltese-sketch.html.
• [153] Stefan Müller (2009b), On predication, in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 213-233, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/predication.html.
• [154] Stefan Müller (2010a), Grammatiktheorie [Grammatical Theory], number 20 in Stauffenburg Einführungen, Stauffenburg Verlag, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/grammatiktheorie.html.
• [155] Stefan Müller (2010b), Persian complex predicates and the limits of inheritance-based analyses, Journal of Linguistics, 46 (3): 601-655, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/persian-cp.html.
• [156] Stefan Müller (2012), On the copula, specificational constructions and type shifting, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/copula.html, draft, Freie Universität Berlin.
• [157] Stefan Müller (2013a), Grammatiktheorie [Grammatical Theory], number 20 in Stauffenburg Einführungen, Stauffenburg Verlag, 2nd edition, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/grammatiktheorie.html.
• [158] Stefan Müller (2013b), Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar: Eine Einführung [Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar: an Introduction], number 17 in Stauffenburg Einführungen, Stauffenburg Verlag, 3rd edition, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/hpsg-lehrbuch.html.
• [159] Stefan Müller (2013c), Unifying everything: Some remarks on Simpler Syntax, Construction Grammar, Minimalism and HPSG, Language, 89 (4): 920-950, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/unifying-everything.html.
• [160] Stefan Müller (2014a), Artenvielfalt und Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar [Biological diversity and Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar], in Syntaxtheorien: Analysen im Vergleich, number 28 in Stauffenburg Einführungen, pp. 187-233, Stauffenburg Verlag, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/artenvielfalt.html.
• [161] Stefan Müller (2014b), Elliptical constructions, multiple frontings, and surface-based syntax, in Proceedings of Formal Grammar 2004, pp. 91-109, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/surface.html.
• [162] Stefan Müller (2014c), Kernigkeit: Anmerkungen zur Kern-Peripherie-Unterscheidung [Coriness: Some remarks on the core-periphery distinction], in Andreas Nolda, Athina Sioupi, and Antonio Machicao y Priemer, editors, Zwischen Kern und Peripherie, number 76 in studia grammatica, pp. 25-39, de Gruyter, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/kernigkeit.html.
• [163] Stefan Müller (2014d), Satztypen: Lexikalisch oder/und phrasal [Sentence types. Lexically and/or phrasally], in Rita Finkbeiner and Jörg Meibauer, editors, Satztypen und Konstruktionen im Deutschen, Linguistik – Impulse und Tendenzen, de Gruyter, To appear.
• [164] Stefan Müller (2015a), German Sentence Structure: An Analysis with Special Consideration of So-Called Multiple Fronting, Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax, Language Science Press, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/gs.html, in Preparation.
• [165] Stefan Müller (2015b), Grammatical Theory: From Transformational Grammar to Constraint-Based Approaches, number 1 in Lecture Notes in Language Sciences, Language Science Press, In Preparation.
• [166] Stefan Müller (2015c), HPSG – a synopsis, in Artemis Alexiadou and Tibor Kiss, editors, Syntax – Theory and Analysis. An International Handbook, number 42.2 in Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science, chapter 27, Walter de Gruyter, 2nd edition, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/hpsg-hsk.html, In Print.
• [167] Stefan Müller, Felix Bildhauer, and Philippa Cook (2012), Beschränkungen für die scheinbar mehrfache Vorfeldbesetzung im Deutschen [Constraints on apparent multiple frontings in German], in Colette Cortès, editor, Satzeröffnung. Formen, Funktionen, Strategien, number 31 in Eurogermanistik, pp. 113-128, Stauffenburg Verlag.
• [168] Stefan Müller and Masood Ghayoomi (2010), PerGram: A TRALE implementation of an HPSG fragment of Persian, in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Multiconference on Computer Science and Information Technology – Computational Linguistics Applications (CLA’10), volume 5, pp. 461-467, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/pergram.html.
• [169] Stefan Müller and Janna Lipenkova (2009), Serial verb constructions in Chinese: An HPSG account, in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 234-254, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/chinese-svc.html.
• [170] Stefan Müller and Janna Lipenkova (2013), ChinGram: A TRALE implementation of an HPSG fragment of Mandarin Chinese, in Proceedings of the 27th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information, and Computation (PACLIC 27), pp. 240-249, Department of English, National Chengchi University.
• [171] Stefan Müller and Janna Lipenkova (In Preparation), Mandarin Chinese in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax, Language Science Press.
• [172] Stefan Müller and Bjarne Ørsnes (2011), Positional expletives in Danish, German, and Yiddish, in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 167-187, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/expletives.html.
• [173] Stefan Müller and Bjarne Ørsnes (2013a), Passive in Danish, English, and German, in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 140-160.
• [174] Stefan Müller and Bjarne Ørsnes (2013b), Towards an HPSG analysis of object shift in Danish, in Glyn Morrill and Mark-Jan Nederhof, editors, Formal Grammar: 17th and 18th International Conferences, FG 2012/2013, number 8036 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 69-89, Springer Verlag, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/object-shift.html.
• [175] Stefan Müller and Bjarne Ørsnes (2015), Danish in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax, Language Science Press, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/danish.html, In Preparation.
• [176] Stefan Müller, Pollet Samvelian, and Olivier Bonami (In Preparation), Persian in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax, Language Science Press, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/persian.html.
• [177] Stefan Müller and Stephen Mark Wechsler (2014), Lexical approaches to argument structure, Theoretical Linguistics, 40 (1-2): 1-76, http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/~stefan/Pub/arg-st.html.
• [178] Mariacristina Musso, Andrea Moro, Volkmar Glauche, Michel Rijntjes, Jürgen Reichenbach, Christian Büchel, and Cornelius Weiller (2003), Broca’s area and the language instinct, Nature Neuroscience, 6 (7): 774-781.
• [179] Klaus Netter (1991), Clause union phenomena and complex predicates in German, in Klaus Netter and Mike Reape, editors, Clause Structure and Word Order Variation in Germanic, DYANA Report R1.1.B, University of Edinburgh.
• [180] Frederick J. Newmeyer (2005), Possible and Probable Languages: A Generative Perspective on Linguistic Typology, Oxford University Press.
• [181] Frederick J. Newmeyer (2010), On comparative concepts and descriptive categories: A reply to Haspelmath, Language, 86 (3): 688-695.
• [182] Sourabh Niyogi and Robert C. Berwick (2005), A Minimalist implementation of Hale-Keyser incorporation theory, in Anna Maria Di Sciullo, editor, UG and External Systems: Language, Brain and Computation, number 75 in Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, pp. 269-288, John Benjamins Publishing Co.
• [183] Torbjørn Nordgård (1994), E-Parser: An implementation of a deterministic GB-related parsing system, Computers and the Humanities, 28 (4-5): 259-272.
• [184] Geoffrey Nunberg, Ivan A. Sag, and Thomas Wasow (1994), Idioms, Language, 70 (3): 491-538.
• [185] Stephan Oepen and John A. Carroll (2000), Parser engineering and performance profiling, Natural Language Engineering, 6 (1): 81-97, http://www.delph-in.net/itsdb/publications/parsing.ps.gz.
• [186] Stephan Oepen and Daniel P. Flickinger (1998), Towards systematic grammar profiling. Test suite technology ten years after, Journal of Computer Speech and Language, 12 (4): 411-436, http://www.delph-in.net/itsdb/publications/profiling.ps.gz, (Special Issue on Evaluation).
• [187] Stephan Oepen, Klaus Netter, and Judith Klein (1997), TSNLP – Test Suites for Natural Language Processing, in John Nerbonne, editor, Linguistic Databases, pp. 13-36, CSLI Publications.
• [188] Bjarne Ørsnes (2009), Preposed negation in Danish, in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 255-275.
• [189] Gerald Penn (2004), Balancing clarity and efficiency in typed feature logic through delaying, in Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 239-246.
• [190] David M. Perlmutter (1978), Impersonal passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis, in Proceedings of the 4th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 157-189.
• [191] Stanley Roy Petrick (1965), A Recognition Procedure for Transformational Grammars, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Modern Languages, MIT, http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/13013.
• [192] Colin Phillips (2003), Linear order and constituency, Linguistic Inquiry, 34 (1): 37-90.
• [193] Carl J. Pollard (1996), On head non-movement, in Harry Bunt and Arthur van Horck, editors, Discontinuous Constituency, number 6 in Natural Language Processing, pp. 279-305, Mouton de Gruyter, published Master’s thesis from 1990.
• [194] Carl J. Pollard and Ivan A. Sag (1987), Information-Based Syntax and Semantics, number 13 in CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI Publications.
• [195] Carl J. Pollard and Ivan A. Sag (1994), Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, The University of Chicago Press.
• [196] Paul M. Postal (2009), The incoherence of Chomsky’s ‘Biolinguistic’ ontology, Biolinguistics, 3 (1): 104-123.
• [197] Adam Przepiórkowski (1999), On case assignment and “adjuncts as complements”, in Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre Koenig, and Andreas Kathol, editors, Lexical and Constructional Aspects of Linguistic Explanation, number 1 in Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism, pp. 231-245, CSLI Publications.
• [198] Geoffrey K. Pullum (1985), Assuming some version of X-bar Theory, in Papers from the 21st Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 323-353.
• [199] Geoffrey K. Pullum (1989), Formal linguistics meets the boojum, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 7 (1): 137-143, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00141350.
• [200] Geoffrey K. Pullum (1991), The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and Other Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language, The University of Chicago Press.
• [201] Geoffrey K. Pullum (2007), The evolution of model-theoretic frameworks in linguistics, in Model-Theoretic Syntax at 10 – Proceedings of the ESSLLI 2007 MTS@10 Workshop, August 13-17, pp. 1-10, http://cs.earlham.edu/esslli07mts/.
• [202] Geoffrey K. Pullum and Barbara C. Scholz (2001), On the distinction between generative-enumerative and model-theoretic syntactic frameworks, in Philippe de Groote, Glyn Morrill, and Christian Retor, editors, Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics: 4th International Conference, number 2099 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 17-43, Springer Verlag.
• [203] Geoffrey K. Pullum and Barbara C. Scholz (2002), Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments, The Linguistic Review, 19 (1-2): 9-50.
• [204] Marc Richards (2015), Minimalism, in Artemis Alexiadou and Tibor Kiss, editors, Syntax – Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung, volume 42 of Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science, Mouton de Gruyter, 2nd edition.
• [205] John Robert Ross (1967), Constraints on Variables in Syntax, Ph.D. thesis, MIT, http://www.eric.ed.gov/, reproduced by the Indiana University Linguistics Club.
• [206] Ivan A. Sag (1997), English relative clause constructions, Journal of Linguistics, 33 (2): 431-484, http://lingo.stanford.edu/sag/papers/rel-pap.pdf.
• [207] Ivan A. Sag (2010), English filler-gap constructions, Language, 86 (3): 486-545, http://lingo.stanford.edu/sag/papers/xcons.pdf.
• [208] Ivan A. Sag (2012), Sign-based construction grammar: An informal synopsis, in Hans C. Boas and Ivan A. Sag, editors, Sign-based Construction Grammar, number 193 in CSLI Lecture Notes, pp. 69-202, CSLI Publications, http://lingo.stanford.edu/sag/papers/theo-syno.pdf.
• [209] Ivan A. Sag and Thomas Wasow (2011), Performance-compatible competence grammar, in Robert Borsley and Kersti Börjars, editors, Non-Transformational Syntax: Formal and Explicit Models of Grammar: A Guide to Current Models, pp. 359-377, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
• [210] Ivan A. Sag, Thomas Wasow, and Emily M. Bender (2003), Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction, number 152 in CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI Publications, 2nd edition.
• [211] Pollet Samvelian (2007), A (phrasal) affix analysis of the Persian Ezafe, Journal of Linguistics, 43: 605-645.
• [212] Uli Sauerland and Paul Elbourne (2002), Total reconstruction, PF movement, and derivational order, Linguistic Inquiry, 33 (2): 283-319.
• [213] Harris B. Savin and Ellen Perchonock (1965), Grammatical structure and the immediate recall of English sentences, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4 (5): 348-353.
• [214] Barbara C. Scholz and Geoffrey K. Pullum (2002), Searching for arguments to support linguistic nativism, The Linguistic Review, 19 (1-2): 185-223.
• [215] Edward P. Stabler (1987), Restricting logic grammars with Government-Binding Theory, Computational Linguistics, 13 (1-2): 1-10.
• [216] Edward P. Stabler (1992), The Logical Approach to Syntax: Foundations, Specifications, and Implementations of Theories of Government and Binding, ACL-MIT Press Series in Natural Language Processing, MIT Press.
• [217] Edward P. Stabler (2001), Minimalist grammars and recognition, in Christian Rohrer, Antje Rossdeutscher, and Hans Kamp, editors, Linguistic Form and its Computation, number 1 in Studies in Computational Linguistics, pp. 327-352, CSLI Publications.
• [218] Edward P. Stabler (2010), After Governement and Binding Theory, in Johan F. A. K. van Benthem and G. B. Alice ter Meulen, editors, Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 395-414, MIT Press, 2nd edition, http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/stabler/afterGB.pdf.
• [219] Edward P. Stabler (2011), Computational perspectives on Minimalism, in Cedric Boeckx, editor, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism, chapter 27, pp. 616-641, Oxford University Press, http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/stabler/Stabler10-Min.pdf.
• [220] Mark J. Steedman and Jason Baldridge (2006), Combinatory Categorial Grammar, in Keith Brown, editor, Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, pp. 610-621, Elsevier, 2nd edition.
• [221] Luc Steels, editor (2011), Design Patterns in Fluid Construction Grammar, number 11 in Constructional Approaches to Language, John Benjamins Publishing Co.
• [222] Luc Steels (2013), Fluid Construction Grammar, in Thomas Hoffmann and Graeme Trousdale, editors, The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, Oxford University Press.
• [223] Oliver Suhre (1999), Computational Aspects of a Grammar Formalism for Languages with Freer Word Order, Master’s thesis, Department of Computer Science, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/hpsg/archive/bibliography/papers/suhre_lsl-thesis.pdf.
• [224] Michael K. Tanenhaus, Michael J. Spivey-Knowlton, Kathleen M. Eberhard, and Julie C. Sedivy (1995), Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension, Science, 268 (5217): 1632-1634, http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/mtan/publications/1995Tanenhaus_Sci.pdf.
• [225] Michael K. Tanenhaus, Michael J. Spivey-Knowlton, Kathleen M. Eberhard, and Julie C. Sedivy (1996), Using eye movements to study spoken language comprehension: Evidence for visually mediated incremental interpretation, in Toshio Inui and James L. McClelland, editors, Information Integration in Perception and Communication, number XVI in Attention and Performance, pp. 457-478, MIT Press.
• [226] Michael Tomasello (2003), Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition, Harvard University Press.
• [227] Frank Van Eynde and Liesbeth Augustinus (2014), Complement raising, extraction and adpostion stranding in Dutch, in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, University at Buffalo, pp. 156-175, http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2014/vaneynde-augustinus.pdf.
• [228] Remi van Trijp (2013), A comparison between Fluid Construction Grammar and Sign-Based Construction Grammar, Constructions and Frames, 5 (1): 88-116.
• [229] Remi van Trijp (2014), Long-distance dependencies without filler-gaps: A cognitive-functional alternative in Fluid Construction Grammar, Language and Cognition, pp. 1-29.
• [230] Mettina Veenstra (1998), Formalizing the Minimalist Program, Ph.D. thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
• [231] Arnim von Stechow (1996), The different readings of wieder “again”: A structural account, Journal of Semantics, 13 (2): 87-138.
• [232] Moira Yip, Joan Maling, and Ray S. Jackendoff (1987), Case in tiers, Language, 63 (2): 217-250.
• [233] Arnold M. Zwicky, Joyce Friedman, Barbara C. Hall, and Donald E. Walker (1965), The MITRE syntactic analysis procedure for Transformational Grammars, in Proceedings of the FALL Joint Computer Conference, pp. 317-326, http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/AFIPS.1965.108.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2020).