Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton November 30, 2019

Some thoughts on the complexity of syntactic complexity

Theresa Biberauer EMAIL logo
From the journal Theoretical Linguistics

References

Alexiadou, A. & E. Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Parametrizing Agr: Word order, V-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16(3). 491–531.10.1023/A:1006090432389Search in Google Scholar

Anderson, S. & D. Lightfoot. 2002. The language organ: Linguistics as cognitive psychology. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511613869Search in Google Scholar

Baker, M. 2008a. The macroparameter in a microparametric world. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, 351–374. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.132.16bakSearch in Google Scholar

Baker, M. 2008b. The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511619830Search in Google Scholar

Baker, M. 2018. Structural case: A realm of syntactic microparameters. Linguistic Analysis 41. 191–240.Search in Google Scholar

Baker, M. & J. Bobaljik. 2017. On inherent and dependent theories of ergative case. In J. Coon & D. Massam (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ergativity, 111–134. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739371.013.5Search in Google Scholar

Barbosa, P. 1995. Null subjects. MIT Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Bazalgette, T. 2015. Algorithmic acquisition of focus parameters. University of Cambridge Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Berwick, R. & N. Chomsky. 2011. Biolinguistics: the current state of its evolution and development. In A.M. di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (eds.), The Biolinguistic enterprise: new perspectives in the evolution and nature of the human language faculty, 19–41. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. 2017. Factors 2 and 3: a principled approach. In C. Song & J. Baker (eds.), Cambridge occasional papers in linguistics, vol. 10, 38–65.Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T., A. Holmberg, I. Roberts & M. Sheehan. 2014. Complexity in comparative syntax: The view from modern parametric theory. In F. Newmeyer & L. Preston (eds.), Measuring linguistic complexity, 103–127. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0006Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts. 2012. On the significance of what hasn’t happened. Paper presented at the 12th Diachronic Generative Syntax (DiGS 12) conference (Lisbon).Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts. 2015. Rethinking formal hierarchies: a proposed unification. In J. Chancharu, et al. (eds.), Cambridge occasional papers in linguistics, vol. 7, 1–31.Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts. 2016. Parameter typology from a diachronic perspective: the case of Conditional Inversion. In E. Bidese, et al. (eds.), Theoretical approaches to linguistic variation, 259–291. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.234.10bibSearch in Google Scholar

Bley-Vroman, R. 1989. What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S. Gass & A. Schachter (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition, 141–168. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139524544.005Search in Google Scholar

Bley-Vroman, R. 2009. The evolving context of the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31. 175–198.10.1017/S0272263109090275Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2005. Three factors in Language Design. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 1–22.10.1162/0024389052993655Search in Google Scholar

Culbertson, J. & S. Kirby. 2016. Simplicity and specificity in language: Domain-general biases have domain-specific effects. Frontiers in Psychology 6. 1964.10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01964Search in Google Scholar

Culbertson, J., P. Smolensky & C. Wilson. 2013. Cognitive biases, linguistic universals, and constraint-based grammar learning. Topics in Cognitive Science 5. 392–424.10.1111/tops.12027Search in Google Scholar

Dekydtspotter, L. & J. Hathorn. 2005. Quelque chose. de remarquable in English-French acquisition: Mandatory, informationally encapsulated computations in second language interpretation. Second Language Research 21. 291–323.10.1191/0267658305sr249oaSearch in Google Scholar

Diercks, M. 2012. Parameterizing Case: Evidence from Bantu. Syntax 15(3). 253–286.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2011.00165.xSearch in Google Scholar

Ehret, K. & B. Szmrecsányi. 2016. An information-theoretic approach to assess linguistic complexity. In R. Baechler & G. Seiler (eds.), Complexity, isolation, and variation, 71–94. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110348965-004Search in Google Scholar

Ehret, K. & B. Szmrecsányi. 2019. Compressing learner language: an information-theoretic measure of complexity in SLA production data. Second Language Research 35(1). 23–45.10.1177/0267658316669559Search in Google Scholar

Fodor, J. & W. Sakas. 2017. Learnability. In I. Roberts (ed.), The Oxford handbook of universal grammar, 249–269. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199573776.013.11Search in Google Scholar

Gagliardi, A. 2012. Input and intake in language acquisition. University of Maryland Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Gianollo, C., C. Guardiano & G. Longobardi. 2008. Three fundamental issues in parametric linguistics. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, 109–142. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.132.05giaSearch in Google Scholar

Goad, H. & L. White. 2008. Prosodic structure and representation of L2 functional morphology: a nativist approach. Lingua 118. 577–594.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.01.008Search in Google Scholar

Goad, H. & L. White. in press. Prosodic effects on L2 grammars. Target article to appear in Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism.Search in Google Scholar

Graf, T. 2019. Features: more trouble than they’re worth? Paper presented at the 30 million theories of features workshop. Tromsø. https://thomasgraf.net/doc/talks/Graf19Tromsotalk.pdf (accessed 21 August 2019)Search in Google Scholar

Guasti, M.-T. 2013. Agreement in the production of subject and object wh-questions. In L. Cheng & N. Corver (eds.), Diagnosing syntax, 295–313. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602490.003.0014Search in Google Scholar

Hale, K. 1996. Can UG and L2 be distinguished in L2 acquisition? Behavioural and Brain Sciences 19. 726–728.10.1017/S0140525X00043661Search in Google Scholar

Harbour, D. 2017. Frankenduals: Their typology, structure, and significance. Unpublished ms: Queen Mary University of London https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/00378010.1353/lan.2020.0002Search in Google Scholar

Himmelreich, A. 2017. Case matching effects in free relatives and parasitic gaps: A study on the properties of Agree. Leipzig University Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Juola, P. 1998. Measuring linguistic complexity: the morphological tier. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 5. 206–213.10.1080/09296179808590128Search in Google Scholar

Juola, P. 2008. Assessing linguistic complexity. In M. Miestamo, et al. (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 89–107. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94.07juoSearch in Google Scholar

Levin, T. 2016. Successive-cyclic case assignment: Korean nominative-nominative case-stacking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 35(2). 447–498.10.1007/s11049-016-9342-zSearch in Google Scholar

Longobardi, G. 2017. Principles, parameters, and schemata: A radically underspecified UG. Linguistic Analysis 41(3–4). 517–558.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, M., et al. (eds.). 2008. Language complexity: Typology, contact, change. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94Search in Google Scholar

Newmeyer, F. & L. Preston (eds.). 2014. Measuring linguistic complexity. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Pinker, S. 1984. Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: HUP.Search in Google Scholar

Preminger, O. 2013. That’s not how you Agree: a reply to Zeijlstra. The Linguistic Review 30(3). 491–500.10.1515/tlr-2013-0015Search in Google Scholar

Ramchand, G. & P. Svenonius. 2014. Deriving the functional hierarchy. Language Sciences 46. 152–174.10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.013Search in Google Scholar

Rothman, J. & R. Slabakova. 2018. The generative approach to SLA and its place in modern second language studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40. 417–442.10.1017/S0272263117000134Search in Google Scholar

Trudgill, P. 2011. Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Tsimpli, I. & M. Dimitrakopoulou. 2007. The Interpretability Hypothesis: evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 23. 215–242.10.1177/0267658307076546Search in Google Scholar

van Gelderen, E. 2004. Grammaticalization as economy. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.71Search in Google Scholar

van Gelderen, E. 2011. The linguistic cycle: Language change and the language faculty. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199756056.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Walkden, G. 2014. Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198712299.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Wallage, P. 2017. Negation in early English. Grammatical and functional change. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/9781316335185Search in Google Scholar

White, L. 2003. Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511815065Search in Google Scholar

Wiltschko, M. 2014. The universal structure of categories. Towards a formal typology. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139833899Search in Google Scholar

Zeijlstra, H. 2004. Sentential negation and negative concord. University of Amsterdam Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Zeijlstra, H. 2008. On the syntactic flexibility of formal features. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, 143–174. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.132.06zeiSearch in Google Scholar

Zeijlstra, H. 2012. There is only one way to Agree. The Linguistic Review 29. 491–553.10.1515/tlr-2012-0017Search in Google Scholar

Zeijlstra, H. 2014. On the interpretability of interpretable features. In P. Kosta, et al. (eds.), Minimalism and beyond. Radicalizing the interfaces, 109–129. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/lfab.11.05zeiSearch in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-11-30
Published in Print: 2019-12-18

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 30.11.2022 from frontend.live.degruyter.dgbricks.com/document/doi/10.1515/tl-2019-0017/html
Scroll Up Arrow