A Syntactic Universal and Its Consequences

By Theresa Biberauer, Anders Holmberg, I. Roberts. Linguistic Inquiry, 2014

190 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Language and Linguistics, Philosophy

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e2892ed93d08edb6d2d37b1c438a866f8b22b51e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Language and Linguistics

1. G. Walkden
2. Waltraud Paul
3. Thomas Grano

Citations in the corpus

• Why particles are not particular: sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP (2014, background): “…where both rúguŏ ‘if’ and the non-root C dehuà are present seems at first sight to confirm a reviewer’s view that SFP are just the particle counterpart of a “full” element expressing a similar meaning, where this full element obeys the FOFC (cf. Biberauer et al. 2010, p. 53ff for a similar view).”
• Language contact and V3 in Germanic varieties new and old (2017, background): “Besides, it has been argued that a head-final TP is universally ruled out with a head-initial VP (Biberauer et al. 2014). but not always—pronominal, a fact which is at least unexpected under the TP approach.7 While none of these issues with the TP approach may be irresolvable, in light of these…”