Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Theoretical Linguistics

An Open Peer Review Journal

Editor-in-Chief: Krifka, Manfred

Ed. by Gärtner, Hans-Martin

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 4.500

CiteScore 2018: 0.46

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.233
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.337

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 45, Issue 3-4


Interpreting (un)interpretability

George Walkden / Anne Breitbarth
Published Online: 2019-11-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2019-0022


  • Baker, P. 1996. Some developmental inferences from historical studies of pidgins and creoles. In J. Arends (ed.), The early stages of creolization, 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Biberauer, T. 2017. Factors 2 and 3: A principled approach. Cambridge Occasional Papers in Linguistics 10. 38–65.Google Scholar

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

  • Bley-Vroman, R. 2009. The evolving context of the fundamental difference hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31. 175–198.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Breitbarth, A., C. Lucas & D. Willis. Forthcoming. The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean. Vol. 2: Patterns and processes. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar

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

  • Chomsky, N. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 1–22.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cornips, L. 2008. Losing grammatical gender in Dutch: The result of bilingual acquisition and/or an act of identity? International Journal of Bilingualism 12(1&2). 105–124.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dixon, R. M. W. & A. Y. Aikhenvald. 1999. The Amazonian languages. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar

  • Grüter, T., C. Lew-Williams & A. Fernald. 2012. Grammatical gender in L2: A production or a real-time processing problem? Second Language Research 28(2). 191–215.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Haegeman, L. & T. Lohndal. 2010. Negative concord and (multiple) Agree: A case study of West Flemish. Linguistic Inquiry 41. 181–211.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Lucas, C. 2012. Contact-induced grammatical change: Towards an explicit account. Diachronica 29(3). 275–300.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mayr, E. 2004. What makes biology unique? Considerations on the autonomy of a scientific discipline. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar

  • Morgan, J. L. 1972. Verb agreement as a rule of English. Chicago Linguistics Society 8. 278–286.Google Scholar

  • Orgassa, A. & F. Weerman. 2008. Dutch gender in specific language impairment and second language acquisition. Second Language Research 24(3). 333–364.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Parodi, T. 2016. Formal features and vulnerable domains in L2 acquisition and an outlook on language contact. In S. Fischer & M. Navarro (eds.), Proceedings of the VII Nereus international workshop: “Clitic doubling and other issues of the syntax/semantic interface in Romance DPs” (Arbeitspapier 128), 91–103. Konstanz: Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar

  • Preminger, O. 2019. What the PCC tells us about “abstract” agreement, head movement, and locality. Glossa 4(1). 13.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

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

  • Tsimpli, I. M., & M. Dimitrakopoulou. 2007. The interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 23. 215–242.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Unsworth, S. 2008. Age and input in the acquisition of grammatical gender in Dutch. Second Language Research 24(3). 365–395.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • van Gelderen, E. 2007. The definiteness cycle in Germanic. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 19. 275–308.Google Scholar

  • van Gelderen, E. 2011. The linguistic cycle: Language change and the language faculty. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar

  • Zeijlstra, H. 2008. Negative concord is syntactic agreement. Ms, lingBuzz/000645.Google Scholar

  • Zeijlstra, H. 2004. Sentential negation and negative concord. Universiteit van Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Zeijlstra, H. 2014. On the uninterpretability of interpretable features. In P. Kosta et al. (eds.), Minimalism and beyond: Radicalizing the interfaces, 109–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2019-11-30

Published in Print: 2019-12-18

Citation Information: Theoretical Linguistics, Volume 45, Issue 3-4, Pages 309–317, ISSN (Online) 1613-4060, ISSN (Print) 0301-4428, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2019-0022.

Export Citation

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in