Skip to main content
Log in

The Revolution Confused: A Response To Our Critics

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

REFERENCES

  • Brody, Michael. 1995. Lexico-Logical Form: A Radically Minimalist Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1955/1975. The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures, Janua Linguarum Series Minor 4, Mouton, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1972. ‘Some Empirical Issues in the Theory of Transformational Grammar’, in P. S. Peters (ed.), Goals of Linguistic Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: pp. 63-130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1977. ‘On wh-Movement’, in Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and Adrian Akmajian (eds.), Formal Syntax, Academic Press, New York, pp. 71-132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Studies in Generative Grammar, Vol. 9, Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1991. ‘Some Notes on Economy of Derivation and Representation’, in Robert Freidin (ed.), Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 417-454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1993. ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’, in Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1-52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1998. Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework, unpublished ms., MIT.

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1999. Derivation by Phase, Unpublished ms., MIT.

  • Culicover, Peter W. and Wendy Wilkins. 1984. Locality in Linguistic Theory, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, David and Shalom Lappin. 1997. ‘A Critique of the Minimalist Program’, Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 273-333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, David and Shalom Lappin. 1999. Local Constraints vs. Economy, Stanford: CSLI Jones

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael. 1983. ‘Getting ‘tough’ with Wh-Movement’, Journal of Linguistics 19, 129-159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasnik, Howard and Robert Fiengo. 1974. ‘Complement-Object Deletion’, Linguistic Inquiry 5, 535-571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, Robert D. 1984a. ‘Against Reanalysis Rules’, Linguistic Analysis 14, 3-30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, Robert. 1984b. ‘A Note on Right Node Raising, ‘tough’ Constructions, and Reanalysis Rules‘, Linguistic Analysis 13, 857-870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Postal, Paul and Geoffrey Pullum. 1988. ‘Expletive Noun Phrases in Subcategorized Positions’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 635-670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, Alan D. and Jean Bricmont. 1998. Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science, Picador, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Edwin. 1983. ‘Against Small Clauses’, Linguistic Inquiry 9, 287-308.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lappin, S., Levine, R.D. & Johnson, D.E. The Revolution Confused: A Response To Our Critics. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 18, 873–890 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006416625270

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006416625270

Keywords

Navigation