Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure

By Gerald Gazdar. 1981

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Language-particular syntactic rules and constraints: English locative inversion and do-support (2010, background): “The reason that 47c is ungrammatical, in this account, is either that unlike constituents have been coordinated (Gazdar 1981, Falk 1983), or that the extraction of the subject from one conjunct would violate movement constraints (Woolford 1987).”
Poverty of the Stimulus Revisited (2011, background): “might be described in terms of a meta-rule such as: Given the form [VP X V X], there is the form [Q V NP X], with V an auxiliary verb and Q denoting a question phrase (Gazdar, 1981).”
Headed relative clauses in generative syntax - Part II (2002, methodology): “…in the framework of unification-based grammars (GPSG and later HPSG), based on the percolation of nonlocal features, and incorporating an idea of Gazdar (1981): the trace in the relativization site is endowed with a nonlocal SLASH feature, which is inherited by the containing phrases up to the…”
Satisfying Constraints on Extraction andAdjunction (2001, methodology): “As noted by Hukari and Levine (1996a) in their review of PS-94, the resulting system is inelegant and seems to give the wrong predictions for certain instances of parasitic gaps.”
A–movement and the EPP (2002, background): “…extraposition involves movement of the extraposed element, is provided by split-antecedent constructions notedby Perlmutter and Ross (1970; seealso Gazdar1981), wherethere is no plausible sourcefor the base-generation of the extraposed elementwithin an NP. (The following constructions are…”
The logic of syntactic priming and acceptability judgments (2016, unknown): “But according to Gazdar (1981), slash categories differ at the categorical level from other categories.”
T-to-C Movement: Causes and Consequences (2000, background): “9 The literature contains some skepticism about whether nominative wh-phrases really do move to Spec,CP in questions like (5d) (Gazdar 1981; Chung and McCloskey 1983; Chomsky 1986).”
English relative clause constructions (1997, methodology): “On the feature INV, see Gazdar et. al. (1982) and Green & Morgan (1996). (13)I leave open the possibility of collapsing these into a single principle.”