Reply published In: Studies in Language
Vol. 42:2 (2018) ► pp.487–503
Reply
Reply to the Reviews of Case: Its Principles and Parameters
Published online: 6 June 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.16079.bak
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.16079.bak
References (14)
Baker, Mark. 2001. Phrase structure as a representation of “primitive” grammatical relations. In William Davies and Stan Dubinsky (eds.), Objects and other subjects: grammatical functions, functional categories and configurationality, 21–52. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
. 2014. On dependent ergative case (in Shipibo) and its derivation by phase. Linguistic Inquiry 451.341–379.
Baker, Mark and Jonathan Bobaljik. 2017. On inherent and dependent theories of ergative case. In Jessica Coon, Diane Massam, and Lisa Travis (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ergativity, 111–134. New York: Oxford University Press.
Comrie, Bernard. 1978. Ergativity. In Winfred Lehmann (ed.), Syntactic Typology, 329–394. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.
Deal, Amy Rose. 2016. Raising to ergative: Remarks on applicatives of unergatives. Ms. University of California Berkeley. To appear in Linguistic Inquiry 50.2. Available at [URL]
Heusinger, Klaus von, Udo Klein, and Dolgor Guntsetseg. 2011. The case of accusative embedded subjects in Mongolian. Lingua 1211.48–59.
Marantz, Alec. 1991. Case and licensing. Paper presented at
The 8th Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, University of Maryland, Baltimore.
Valenzuela, Pilar. 2003. Transitivity in Shipibo-Konibo Grammar. Eugene, Ore.: University of Oregon Ph.D. dissertation.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
