Adger, David. 1997. VSO order and weak pronouns in Goidelic Celtic. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 42. 9–29.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Adger, David. 2007. Pronouns postpose at PF. Linguistic Inquiry 38. 343–349.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Agbayani, Brian & Chris Golston. 2010. Phonological movement in Classical Greek. Language 86. 133–167.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Agbayani, Brian & Chris Golston. 2016. Phonological constituents and their movement in Latin. Phonology 33. 1–42.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Agbayani, Brian, Chris Golston & Dasha Henderer. 2011. Prosodic movement. In M.B. Washburn, K. McKinney-Bock, E. Varis, A. Sawyer & B. Tomaszewicz (eds.), Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 231–239. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar

Agbayani, Brian, Chris Golston & Toru Ishii. 2015. Syntactic and prosodic scrambling in Japanese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33. 47–77.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Arnhold, Anja. 2014. Prosodic structure and focus realization in West Greenlandic. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic typology II, 216–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Arnhold, Anja, Richard Compton & Emily Elfner. to appear. Prosody and wordhood in South Baffin Inuktitut. In M. Keough (ed.), Proceedings of the workshop on structure and constituency in languages of the Americas 21. Vancouver: UBC Working Papers in Linguistics (in press).Google Scholar

Beckman, Mary & Janet Pierrehumbert. 1986. Intonational structure in English and Japanese. Phonology 3. 255–309.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Bennett, Ryan, Emily Elfner & James McCloskey. 2015. Pronouns and prosody in Irish. In L. Breatnach, R. Ó hUiginn, D. McManus & K. Simms (eds.), XIV International Congress of Celtic Studies Maynooth 2011 Proceedings, 19–74. Dublin: Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar

Bennett, Ryan, Emily Elfner & James McCloskey. 2016. Lightest to the right: An apparently anomalous displacement in Irish. Linguistic Inquiry 47. 169–234.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Bennett, Ryan, Emily Elfner & James McCloskey. 2017. Prosody, focus and ellipsis in Irish. Ms., Santa Cruz, CA and Toronto, ON, Canada: University of California, Santa Cruz and York University.Google Scholar

Chen, Matthew. 1987. The syntax of Xiamen tone sandhi. Phonology 4. 109–150.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen & Laura J. Downing. 2012. Prosodic domains do not match spell-out domains. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 22. 1–14.Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen & Laura J. Downing. 2016. Phasal syntax =cyclic phonology? Syntax 19. 156–191.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–156. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra & James McCloskey. 1987. Government, barriers and small clauses in modern Irish. Linguistic Inquiry 18. 173–237.Google Scholar

Clemens, Lauren & Jessica Coon. to appear. Deriving verb initial word order in Mayan. Language (in press).Google Scholar

Clemens, Lauren Eby. 2014. Prosodic noun incorporation and verb-initial syntax. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar

Compton, Richard & Christine Pittman. 2010. Word-formation by phase in Inuit. Lingua 120. 2167–2192.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Cooper, William E. & Jeanne Paccia-Cooper. 1980. Syntax and speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Dobashi, Yoshihito. 2003. Phonological phrasing and syntactic derivation. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar

Dobashi, Yoshihito. 2013. Autonomy of prosody and prosodic domain formation: A derivational approach. Linguistic Analysis 38. 331–355.Google Scholar

Elfner, Emily. 2011. The interaction of linearization and prosody: Evidence from pronoun postposing in Irish. In A. Carnie (ed.), Formal approaches to celtic linguistics, 17–40. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar

Elfner, Emily. 2012. Syntax-prosody interactions in Irish. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar

Elfner, Emily. 2015. Recursion in prosodic phrasing: Evidence from Connemara Irish. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33. 1169–1208.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Elordieta, Gorka. 2015. Recursive phonological phrasing in Basque. Phonology 32. 49–78.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Féry, Caroline & Hubert Truckenbrodt. 2005. Sisterhood and tonal scaling. Studia Linguistica 59. 223–243.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Fox, Danny & David Pesetsky. 2005. Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics 31. 1–45.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Gee, James Paul & François Grosjean. 1983. Performance structures: A psycholinguistic and linguistic appraisal. Cognitive Psychology 15. 411–458.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Ghini, Marco. 1993. Phi-formation in Italian: A new proposal. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 12. 41–78.Google Scholar

Guekguezian, Peter Ara. 2017. Templates as the interaction of recursive word structure and prosodic well-formedness. Phonology 34. 81–120.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Halpern, Aaron. 1992. Topics in the syntax and placement of clitics. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Hamlaoui, Fatima & Kriszta Szendrői. 2015. A flexible approach to the mapping of intonational phrases. Phonology 32. 79–110.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Hamlaoui, Fatima & Kriszta Szendrői. 2017. The syntax-phonology mapping of intonational phrases in complex sentences: A flexible approach. In L. Clemens & E. Elfner (eds.), Special collection: Prosody & constituent structure. Glossa. 2(1). 55.Google Scholar

Huijsmans, Marianne. 2015. Linearization and prosodic phrasing: The case of SENĆOTEN second-position clitics. MA Thesis, University of Victoria.Google Scholar

Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2007. Major phrase, focus intonation, and multiple spell-out. The Linguistic Review 24. 137–167.Google Scholar

Ito, Junko & Armin Mester. 1992. Weak layering and word binarity. In T. Honma, M. Okazaki, T. Tabata & S.-I. Tanaka (eds.), A new century of phonology and phonological theory. A festschrift for Professor Shosuke Haraguchi on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, 26–65. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar

Ito, Junko & Armin Mester. 2007. Prosodic adjunction in Japanese compounds. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 55. 97–111.Google Scholar

Ito, Junko & Armin Mester. 2012. Recursive prosodic phrasing in Japanese. In T. Borowsky, S. Kawahara, T. Shinya & M. Sugahara (eds.), Prosody matters. London: Equinox Press.Google Scholar

Ito, Junko & Armin Mester. 2013. Prosodic subcategories in Japanese. Lingua 124. 20–40.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.). 2005. Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.). 2014. Prosodic typology II: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jun, Sun-Ah & Gorka Elordieta. 1997. Intonational structure in Lekeitio Basque. In A. Botinis, G. Kouroupetroglou & G. Carayiannis (eds.), Intonation: Theory, models and applications, 193–196. Athens, Greece: ISCA.Google Scholar

Kaisse, Ellen M. 1985. Connected speech: The interaction of syntax and phonology. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika & Elisabeth Selkirk. 2007. Phase theory and prosodic spellout: The case of verbs. The Linguistic Review 24. 93–135.Google Scholar

Kubozono, Haruo. 1989. Syntactic and rhythmic effects on downstep in Japanese. Phonology 6. 39–67.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Kubozono, Haruo. 1992. Modeling syntactic effects on downstep in Japanese. In G. Docherty & D.R. Ladd (eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology, vol. II: Gesture, segment, prosody, 368–387. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ladd, D. Robert. 1986. Intonational phrasing: The case for recursive prosodic structure. Phonology 3. 311–340.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Ladd, D. Robert. 1988. Declination ‘reset’ and the hierarchical organization of utterances. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84. 530–544.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Ladd, D. Robert. 2008 [1996]. Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lehiste, Ilse. 1973. Phonetic disambiguation of syntactic ambiguity. Glossa 7. 107–123.Google Scholar

López, Luis. 2009. Ranking the linear correspondence axiom. Linguistic Inquiry 40. 239–276.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

McCarthy, John J. & Alan Prince. 1995. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In J. Beckman, L. Walsh Dickey & S. Urbanczyk (eds.), Papers in optimality theory, 249–384. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar

McCawley, James D. 1968. The phonological component of a grammar of Japanese. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

McCloskey, James. 1999. On the right edge in Irish. Syntax 2. 189–209.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Myrberg, Sara. 2013. Sisterhood in prosodic branching. Phonology 30. 73–124.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Newell, Heather. 2008. Aspects of the morphology and phonology of phases. Doctoral dissertation, McGill University.Google Scholar

Newell, Heather & Glyne Piggott. 2014. Interactions at the syntax-phonology interface: Evidence from Ojibwe. Lingua 150. 332–362.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Pak, Majorie. 2008. The postsyntactic derivation and its phonological reflexes. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of english intonation. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, Janet & Mary Beckman. 1988. Japanese tone structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky. 2004 [1993]. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University RuCCS Technical Report.Google Scholar

Richards, Norvin. 2010. Uttering trees. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Richards, Norvin. 2016. Contiguity theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Richards, Norvin. 2017. Deriving contiguity. Ms., MIT. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003289, Accessed January 4, 2018.Google Scholar

Seidl, Amanda. 2001. Minimal indirect reference: A theory of the syntax-phonology interface. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1980. Prosodic domains in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In M. Aronoff & M.-L. Kean (eds.), Juncture, 107–129. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1981 [1978]. On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In T. Fretheim (ed.), 111–140 Nordic prosody. Trondheim: TAPIR.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 371–405.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1995. The prosodic structure of function words. In J. Beckman, L. W. Dickey & S. Urbanczyk (eds.), Papers in optimality theory, 439–470. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2009. On clause and intonational phrase in Japanese: The syntactic grounding of prosodic constituent structure. Gengo Kenkyu 136. 35–73.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2011. The syntax-phonology interface. In J. Goldsmith, J. Riggle & A. Yu (eds.) The handbook of phonological theory, 2nd edn, 435–484.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth & Koichi Tateishi. 1988. Constraints on minor phrase formation in Japanese. In Papers from the 24th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 316–336. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth & Tong Shen. 1990. Prosodic domains in Shanghai Chinese. In S. Inkelas & D. Zec (eds.), The phonology-syntax connection, 313–337. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth & Koichi Tateishi. 1991. Syntax and downstep in Japanese. In C. Georgopoulos & R. Ishihara (eds.), Interdisciplinary approaches to language: Essays in honor of S.-Y. Kuroda. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth & Seunghun J. Lee. 2015. Constituent structure in phonology. Phonology 31. 1–18.Google Scholar

Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1995. Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar

Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1999. On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 30. 219–256.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Uriagereka, Juan. 1999. Multiple spell-out. In S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein (eds.), Working minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Wagner, Michael. 2005. Prosody and recursion. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar

Wagner, Michael. 2010. Prosody and recursion in coordinate structures and beyond. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 28. 183–237.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Wagner, Michael. 2015. Phonological evidence in syntax. In T. Kiss & A. Alexiadou (eds.), Syntax – theory and analysis. An international Handbook, 1154–1198. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Werle, Adam. 2009. Word, phrase, and clitic prosody in Bosnian, Serbian, and Croatian. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar

Windsor, Joseph W. 2017. Predicting prosodic structure by morphosyntactic category: A case study of Blackfoot. In L. Clemens & E. Elfner (eds.), Special collection: Prosody & constituent structure. Glossa. 2(1). 10.Google Scholar